Lett v. Giuliano
2012 R.I. LEXIS 2
R.I.2012Background
- Plaintiff Lett sought probate of Louis J. Giuliano, Sr.'s 1995 will naming Lett executrix and primary beneficiary; Giuliano, Jr. challenged the will as an adult son; Probate Court denied probate due to witnesses' inability to recall signing circumstances; Lett appealed to Superior Court; initial summary judgment in Lett's favor was reversed on appeal due to disputed execution and genuineness issues; on remand, trial proceeded with testimony from the Drafting Attorney and two witnesses, then Lett sought judgment and a new trial, with issues about testamentary capacity, age, and evidentiary rulings; the Superior Court ultimately affirmed, and the Supreme Court denied relief on all claimed errors.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the dismissal motion for failure to transmit a complete probate record was proper | Lett | Giuliano, Jr. | Dismissal improper; record transmission substantial; rare dismissal not warranted. |
| Whether the jury should have been instructed on testamentary capacity and age | Lett bears burden of proof on capacity/age | Giuliano, Jr. argued failure to prove capacity/age; instructions required | Trial court did not err; evidence supported capacity; age not disputed; no instruction needed. |
| Whether judgment as a matter of law was proper on testamentary capacity | Lett presented sufficient evidence of capacity | Giuliano, Jr. contended lack of proof of capacity | Jury findings supported; no entitlement to JML on capacity. |
| Whether excluding the estate inventory was reversible error | Inventory relevance to probate matters | Inventory irrelevant to will validity | Exclusion was within trial court discretion; no reversible error. |
Key Cases Cited
- Estate of Hart v. LeBlanc, 853 A.2d 1219 (R.I. 2004) (probate record completeness and de novo review; rare dismissal for missing parts)
- In re Fry's Will, 2 R.I. 88 (R.I. 1852) (presumption of statutory requisites from witnesses)
- Elder v. Elder, 84 R.I. 13 (R.I. 1956) (removing capacity issue when no contrary evidence presented)
- State v. Girard, 799 A.2d 288 (R.I. 2002) (jury instructions must relate to material issues)
- Patino v. Suchnik, 770 A.2d 861 (R.I. 2001) (reasonableness of jury instructions; relate to material issues)
- Morinville v. Old Colony Co-operative Newport National Bank, 522 A.2d 1218 (R.I. 1987) (outline of required propositions of law for jury instructions)
- Compo v. Dexter, 101 R.I. 311 (R.I. 1955) (instructions must address issues raised by the evidence)
- Estate of Griggs v. Estate of Griggs, 845 A.2d 1006 (R.I. 2004) (scope of probate appeal and record transmission)