Flowers v. Siefer (In re Estate of Flowers)
| Decision Date | 07 April 2017 |
| Docket Number | No. L–16–1002,L–16–1002 |
| Citation | 2017 Ohio 1310,88 N.E.3d 599 |
| Parties | IN RE ESTATE OF Virginia FLOWERS Dennis Dean Flowers, et al., Appellee v. Joseph E. Siefer, et al., Appellants |
| Court | Ohio Court of Appeals |
Kevin A. Heban, R. Kent Murphree, Toledo, and John P. Lewandowski, Rossford, for appellee.
John M. Carey and Jared J. Lefevre, Toledo, for appellants.
DECISION AND JUDGMENT
{¶ 1} Appellants, Joseph E. Siefer, the brother of Virginia Flowers, deceased, and Cheri Fosnaught Pittman, Jerrie Fosnaught, and Mari Fosnaught Dutko, the daughters of Flowers, appeal from the October 29, 2015 judgment of the Lucas County Court of Common Pleas, Probate Division, finding Flowers lacked testamentary capacity to change her beneficiary designation on July 6, 2010,1 and that the change was due to undue influence. The trial court also denied the counterclaims of appellants to remove appellee, Dennis Dean Flowers, as executor of Flowers' estate and impose sanctions. For the reasons which follow, we affirm.
{¶ 2} On appeal, appellants assert the following assignments of error:
{¶ 3} Appellee brought suit as executor of the estate of Flowers against appellants and Edward Jones. In its October 29, 2015 judgment entry, the trial court narrowed the issues in the case to Flowers' capacity as of July 6, 2010, the date she changed her beneficiary designation for the funds held in an Edward Jones account from appellee to her daughters. The court also considered whether Flowers was susceptible to undue influence at that time.
{¶ 4} Following a trial to the bench, the probate court found that Flowers had suffered from a loss of mental capacity for some time prior to her move to Ohio, which was also most likely the cause of her loss of employment in 2007. The court found the expert opinions of Dr. Rasor and Dr. Watkins to be extremely compelling because they had actually examined Flowers near the time she executed the beneficiary designation. Therefore, the court held Flowers lacked the testamentary capacity as of July 6, 2010, to execute the change in beneficiary designation. The court further found Flowers' sudden change of beneficiary after coming to Ohio was inconsistent with her years of supporting appellee in opposition to her family and her prior testamentary acts. Thus the court found that her decision was due to undue influence. The court voided the change of beneficiary designation.
{¶ 5} Flowers was trained as a nurse and married in Ohio before moving to South Carolina in the mid–1980s where she eventually became a head surgery nurse. Her daughters described their childhood and their relationship with their mother as typical. After her husband was killed in a work accident in 1993, Flowers received a structured settlement, which was placed in an Edward Jones account.
{¶ 6} In 1996, appellee met Flowers when he began working under her supervision. Flowers' children did not initially object to appellee, but they later questioned whether appellee was interfering with the relationship with their mother and was the cause of her irrational behavior. In March 1998, prior to Flowers' marriage to appellee on May 3, 1998, appellee sued two of the daughters, Mari Jo and Cheri, for defamation and obtained a civil protection order. The suit was settled when the parties apologized to each other in court. Afterward, however, the relationship between the mother and her daughters deteriorated. Mari Jo moved in with Cheri and the daughters stayed away from their mother and appellee.
{¶ 7} After appellee and Flowers were married, appellee quit his job and they lived off Flowers' income. After Flowers lost her job sometime between 2006 and 2008,2 they lived off monthly withdrawals from her Edward Jones account. Appellee testified Flowers was close to his family and they spent time with them instead of her daughters. Flowers executed a will on December 4, 2007, naming appellee as the sole beneficiary and his nieces as alternate beneficiaries.
{¶ 8} The extended family had always visited Flowers on a semi-annual or annual basis and continued to do so after she married appellee. During those visits, the family avoided talking about Flowers' relationship with appellee, although they observed that appellee was loud, demeaning, and abusive toward Flowers and she was afraid of him.
{¶ 9} From 1998 until 2010, the youngest daughter, Mari Jo, maintained some contact with her mother. However, shortly after Flowers lost her job at the hospital, she reconnected with her daughters and Flowers babysat for Cheri and corresponded with Jerri and Mari Jo who lived out of town. Their relationships deteriorated again, however, in 2007 during a family visit when Cheri discovered marijuana drying in a room over the garage and confronted Flowers and appellee in front of the entire family. Flowers asked Cheri to leave while appellee was standing over her. That was the last time the daughters saw their mother before she returned to Ohio in April 2010.
{¶ 10} Appellee testified Flowers did not show any signs of dementia prior to being "released" from her job for an unknown reason. She took a job at a nursing home facility as a charge nurse for a time, but no evidence was presented as to when she quit working altogether. Appellee testified that sometime in 2008, after Flowers' brother died in an automobile accident, Flowers no longer wanted to drive and he sold her car.
{¶ 11} In mid–2009, appellee noticed Flowers started to repeat herself and forget things. She spoke about her deceased brothers as if they were still alive. She had told appellee she did not like doctors, so he never took her to a doctor to be evaluated. Joseph Siefer testified that he saw Flowers for a week in 2009. At that time, she was exhibiting some cognitive problems with her memory. He did not feel comfortable riding with her driving a car. He recalled telling appellee it was time he worked and supported Flowers and got her some medical assistance. Flowers told Siefer she woke up one morning in 2009 and could not see, speak, or move. She later recovered, but her left side was affected.
{¶ 12} At the beginning of 2010, appellee testified he started to monitor Flowers' diet and hygiene because she would forget to eat, bathe, or wear clean clothes. She could no longer drive, cook, or clean. She spent the day playing with her dog, exercising, and helping with yard work. He handled all the family finances. Because she would get confused very easily and become disoriented, he applied to the Social Security Administration for Flowers on April 4, 2010, but the psychological examination to determine her competency was never completed.
{¶ 13} While appellee was on a camping trip to Florida from April 16 to 18, 2010, his mother took Flowers to the hospital because she was found wandering in the yard. Afterward, appellee's mother called the Siefers to pick up Flowers because Flowers wanted to go to Ohio. Appellee did not believe that Flowers had the mental capacity as of April 27, 2010, to make the decision of where to live. Her brothers, however, thought Flowers' mental state was about the same as when they had seen her in 2009. Siefer believed she improved after moving back to Ohio, until she began to decline from mid–2011 until her death in February 2012. They testified that her condition improved when she became more assured she would not return to live with appellee. Each time Flowers saw appellee, however, they observed she would become worse.
{¶ 14} In April 2010, appellee attempted to have the local police help him see Flowers. After meeting with Siefer and Flowers, who indicated that she did not want to see appellee, the police told appellee the family agreed to meet appellee with a lawyer present. Appellee did not want to meet without his own lawyer, so he returned to South Carolina and began legal proceedings there.
{¶ 15} Over the next two months, Siefer sought medical treatment for Flowers because of her memory issues. He did not believe a guardianship was necessary because the only issue at that time was with her memory. Siefer took Flowers to the local Edward Jones office to transfer her account to Ohio. She indicated to Siefer she wanted her children to have her assets, not appellee. She repeated this statement to each of her daughters who testified they did not raise the issue with her. The daughters also testified that Flowers apologized about how she had treated her daughters and allowed their relationship to fall apart and sought to reconcile with them.
{¶ 16} Flowers' brothers took her to meet attorney John Gouttiere on April 27, 2010. Gouttiere testified Flowers told him she had a stroke, although she could not recall the date, which had affected her right side, her speech, and her eyesight. Flowers could not remember when and where she married appellee. She indicated that she did not have a prior will. She knew she had accounts at Edward Jones, but could not recall if she had named appellee as beneficiary. As Flowers became comfortable, she told Gouttiere more about her history. Gouttiere spoke with Flowers privately to ensure that she wanted Siefer to be her attorney-in-fact, and she was unequivocal. A power of attorney was executed on April 29, 2010.
{¶ 17} Gouttiere recalled Siefer stating that Flowers had...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Taylor v. Norfolk S. Ry. Co.
- Ayer v. Morenz-Harbinger
- Penn Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Camilly
- Stanek v. Stanek