Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

872 N.E.2d 1109

Hunter v. KLIMOWICZ

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided August 31, 2007

Indiana Court of Appeals · decided 2007-08-31

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently September 2007

1 district · 3 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2007-08-31

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

ROBB, Judge,

¶1dissenting.

¶2For the reasons set forth in my original concurring in result opinion, I dissent from the majority’s conclusion on rehearing that under the pre-2006 test, Anne met her burden of establishing that she lacked sufficient capacity to execute the Trust. As I previously noted, I do not believe Anne rebutted the presumption that she was of sound mind when she created the Trust, as the testimony shows that Anne did know the extent and nature of her property, the natural objects of her bounty, and their desserts. Therefore, I would reverse the decision of the trial court.

/872/ne2d/1109 · .json · Public domain