Pamela Wallin v. Ross Holliday, 2022-000592

Revocable trust created Oct. 2008; decedent divorced 2013 and later remarried family dynamics affected relationships; 2014 will allocated shares among four children; Sept. 2016 revocation of trust executed with witnesses; decedent died Sept. 28, 2016; Older Children challenged revocation in 2018; circuit court granted Younger Children summary judgment in 2022; matter reversed and remanded on appeal; trust assets estimated around $20 million.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Statute of limitations for contesting trust revocation	Older Children: revocation challenge not barred by §62-7-604(a)	Younger Children: §62-7-604(a) bars the action	Statute of limitations did not bar the claims
Testamentary capacity of the decedent	Evidence shows chronic dementia impairing capacity at revocation	No capacity issue; capacity exists at signing	Genuine issues of material fact precluded summary judgment on capacity
Undue influence in signing the revocation	Presumption of undue influence due to fiduciary relationship with Ross	Proponents rebut the presumption; lack of undue influence proven	Summary judgment improper; issues of undue influence to be resolved on remand

Hairston v. McMillan, 387 S.C. 439, 692 S.E.2d 549 (Ct. App. 2010) (Ct. App. 2010) (insanity/capacity standard for testamentary validity)
Gunnells v. Harkness, 431 S.C. 116, 847 S.E.2d 97 (Ct. App. 2020) (Ct. App. 2020) (fiduciary relationship creates rebuttable undue-influence presumption)
Mock v. Dowling, 266 S.C. 274, 222 S.E.2d 773 (1976) (Supreme Court 1976) (general influence not enough to show undue influence)
Russell v. Wachovia Bank, N.A., 353 S.C. 208, 578 S.E.2d 329 (2003) (Supreme Court 2003) (unmistakable/convincing standard for undue-influence burden of proof)
Loflin v. BMP Dev., LP, 427 S.C. 580, 832 S.E.2d 294 (Ct. App. 2019) (Ct. App. 2019) (summary-judgment standards; review standard)