2022 Ohio 4085
Ohio Ct. App.2022Background
- Decedent Rosaline Haddad executed a 2000 will dividing her estate equally between daughters Tina and Nina, and a 2004 will leaving almost all assets to Nina (only $5,000 to Tina); both documents prepared by attorney Anna Petronzio.
- Tina filed a will-contest after Rosaline’s 2019 death, alleging undue influence and lack of testamentary capacity; she later dropped the capacity claim, so trial focused on undue influence as to the 2004 will.
- Trial evidence included Petronzio’s notes, medical records showing mild brain atrophy, testimony about family tensions and caretaking, and competing expert opinions on susceptibility to undue influence.
- The probate jury found the 2004 will valid and not the product of undue influence; Tina appealed, raising three errors: (1) erroneous jury instruction regarding stipulation on undue influence, (2) admission of hearsay under Evid.R. 804(B)(5), and (3) court’s limitation of trial evidence to roughly 2000–2005.
- The appellate court reviewed the record for abuse of discretion and held that any instruction misstatement was cured by the full charge and written instructions, Evid.R. 804(B)(5) properly permitted decedent hearsay offered by the executor to rebut contestant’s case, and limiting evidence to the period contemporaneous with the will’s execution was appropriate for an undue-influence claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jury instruction misstating a stipulation that decedent was free from undue influence | Haddad: trial court orally told jury parties stipulated decedent was free from undue influence; that misstatement was confusing and prejudicial and required new trial | Maalouf-Masek: misstatement was inadvertent, counsel alerted court, the written instructions omitted the line, and the court’s full charge plainly framed undue-influence elements | Court: no reversible error — misstatement was remedied by expanded oral charge and written instructions; no showing of prejudice |
| Admission of hearsay (Evid.R. 804(B)(5)) — videotaped deposition of decedent’s friend (Sabbagh) | Haddad: rule narrowly applies and is limited to creditor actions; hearsay here was not proper rebuttal and should have been excluded | Maalouf-Masek/executor: 804(B)(5) permits decedent’s out-of-court statements offered by the estate to rebut contestant’s testimony; will contests involve adverse positions so rule applies | Court: 804(B)(5) applies when executor is a party and statements rebut adverse-party testimony; admission was proper to rebut Tina’s case |
| Limitation of trial evidence to ~2000–2005 (precluding post-2005 financial-transfer evidence) | Haddad: later transfers and alleged misuse of assets (2012–2017) showed pattern of elder abuse and were admissible under Evid.R. 404(B) and relevant to undue influence | Maalouf-Masek: undue influence must be shown contemporaneous with will execution; later transactions too remote to prove influence operative at execution | Court: abuse must be shown at or before execution; evidence long after 2004 was too remote to prove undue influence at execution, so limitation was not an abuse of discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- Eberly v. A-P Controls, Inc., 61 Ohio St.3d 27 (1991) (Explains purpose of Evid.R. 804(B)(5) replacing the Dead Man statute and allowing decedent hearsay to rebut adverse-party testimony)
- West v. Henry, 173 Ohio St. 498 (1962) (Defines undue influence as substituting another’s wishes for the testator’s and requires influence operative at execution)
- Van Demark v. Tompkins, 121 Ohio St. 129 (1929) (Holds prior declarations admissible to illustrate testator’s mental state, relationships, and susceptibility to influence)
- Ament v. Reassure Am. Life Ins. Co., 180 Ohio App.3d 440 (2009) (Discusses burden and timing for proving undue influence: influence must be operative at execution)
- Young v. Kaufman, 101 N.E.3d 655 (2017) (Reiterates that general or longstanding influence is not undue influence unless directly applied to the act of making the will)