In re the Estate of Kam, 484 S.W.3d 642

Carol Elam sought probate of a purported will of her father Charles Kam that disinherited her brother David Kam.
David Kam contested on grounds of improper execution and alleged Carol’s undue influence; trial court denied probate.
The alleged new will was prepared after Robert Kam’s death and involved non-attorney Jimmy Carter; witnesses included Collora and Czikora with notarization by Mona Eakin.
Charles Kam’s health deteriorated after a stroke and a family feud over Robert’s estate preceded the will contest.
Two witnesses attested to the signature; the record included a handwritten letter and a June 2012 notarization; the trial court found issues with good faith and the will’s validity.
The appellate court reversed, admitting the will to probate and remanding for estate administration.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Validity of will execution	Elam argues proper execution was shown.	Kam argues improper execution.	Execution proper; attestation sufficient.
Undue influence	Kam asserts Carol unduly influenced Charles to disinherit David.	Kam contends no evidence shows overpowering influence over Charles.	Undue influence not proven; cannot override free will.
Good faith and just cause for fees	Elam contends she acted in good faith.	Kam contends lack of good faith.	Good faith and just cause shown; fees awarded.

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. HB Regal Parc, L.L.C., 383 S.W.3d 253 (Tex.App.—Dallas 2012) (standard for legal sufficiency review in specific context)
City of Keller v. Wilson, 168 S.W.3d 802 (Tex. 2005) (reasonable doubt standard for factual sufficiency; guidance in reviewing evidentiary standards)
Rothermel v. Duncan, 369 S.W.2d 917 (Tex. 1963) (ten factors for undue influence analysis)
In re Estate of Sidransky, 420 S.W.3d 90 (Tex.App.—El Paso 2012) (undue influence elements and evidentiary standards)
In re Estate of Steed, 152 S.W.3d 797 (Tex.App.—Texarkana 2004) (example of evaluating undue influence factors)