In re Estate of Park, No. M2003-00604-COA-R3-CV (TN 11/14/2005), M2003-00604-COA-R3-CV.

Decision Date14 November 2005
Docket NumberNo. M2003-00604-COA-R3-CV.,M2003-00604-COA-R3-CV.
PartiesIN RE ESTATE OF MAPLE FOSTER PARK.
CourtSupreme Court of Tennessee

Appeal from the Chancery Court for Maury County; No. P-156-01; Jim T. Hamilton, Judge.

Judgment of the Chancery Court Affirmed in Part and Reversed in Part.

William R. Hefner and Donald J. Serkin, Brentwood, Tennessee, for the appellant, Linda F. Cathey.

J. Russell Parkes and Wesley Mack Bryant, Columbia, Tennessee, for the appellees, Lula Mae Crabtree, Dirck Dillehay, Katherine Dillehay, Kevin Dillehay, Kyle Dillehay, Jeanne Dillehay Dittmar, Lorena Harris, George L. Lovell, Polly Park Lovell, Edward Carmack Park, Lisa Dillehay Price, Barbara Park Schwarer, and Polly Duvall Wicaruis.

William C. Koch, Jr., P.J., M.S., delivered the opinion of the court, in which William B. Cain and Patricia J. Cottrell, JJ., joined.

OPINION

WILLIAM C. KOCH, JR., P.J., M.S.

This appeal involves the validity of an 88-year-old widow's will that left her rather sizeable estate to her caregiver and her caregiver's husband. Several of the widow's relatives contested the will on the grounds of lack of testamentary capacity and undue influence. Following a bench trial, the Chancery Court for Maury County found that the widow lacked testamentary capacity and that her caregiver had procured the will by undue influence. Accordingly, the trial court invalidated the will and admitted the widow's earlier will to probate. The caregiver asserts on this appeal that the evidence does not support the trial court's conclusions that the widow lacked testamentary capacity when she executed the will or that the will was the product of the caregiver's undue influence. While we have determined that the evidence does not support the trial court's conclusion regarding the widow's testamentary capacity, we have determined that the evidence overwhelmingly supports its conclusion that the will was procured by the caregiver's undue influence.

I.

Maple Foster Park was born in 1913 in Columbia, Tennessee. In 1945, Ms. Park married her highschool sweetheart, F. E. "Gene" Park. The Parks remained in Columbia after they wed, settling on a twenty-one acre farm. Ms. Park worked for BellSouth, and Mr. Park worked for Hunter Furniture Company. Eventually, Mr. Park became part owner of three furniture stores located in Pulaski, Lewisburg, and Columbia. The Parks had no children.

Over the years, the Parks accumulated a sizable estate worth over two million dollars. In 1993, they executed reciprocal wills drafted by T. Edward Lawwell, the Parks' attorney and long-time friend. In these wills, the Parks' entire estate would pass to the surviving spouse if one spouse predeceased the other. Because Ms. Park had no close relatives and had a close relationship with Mr. Park's family, the reciprocal wills contemplated devising the bulk of the estate to Mr. Park's family. In the event that the spouse failed to survive the testator, the estate would be divided six ways, with one-sixth devised to each of Mr. Park's three sisters and his niece and one-twelfth devised to each of Mr. Park's two nephews and remaining two nieces.

In November 1995, Ms. Park hired Linda Faye Cathey to help her on a part-time basis with errands and other household chores. In return for her services, Ms. Park bought groceries and clothes for Ms. Cathey and also paid some of Ms. Cathey's bills. Leon Cathey, Ms. Cathey's husband, began helping Ms. Park with yard work and odd jobs around her home.

Mr. Park died on February 8, 1996. One year later, on May 1, 1997, Ms. Park executed a new will prepared for her by Mr. Lawwell. While the new will was similar to the 1993 will, Ms. Park devised $20,000 and all of her clothing to the Catheys. Shortly after she executed this new will, Ms. Park asked Mr. Lawwell to draft a healthcare power of attorney empowering the Catheys to make emergency medical decisions for Ms. Park until a family member could be contacted.

Ms. Park executed a third will on February 2, 1998 that was substantially similar to her May 1, 1997 will. Since Ms. Park now required full-time assistance, Ms. Cathey took over as her primary caregiver at a salary of $500 per week. Ms. Cathey supervised four other persons providing care to Ms. Park. She also acquired authority from Ms. Park to write and sign checks on Ms. Park's accounts and to act as Ms. Park's agent in certain other business transactions.

In December 1998, Ms. Park asked Mr. Lawwell to draft a codicil to her will increasing her bequest to the Catheys from $20,000 to $25,000. However, before Mr. Lawwell could prepare that codicil, Ms. Park called again requesting that the codicil be changed to increase the cash gift to the Catheys to $100,000 and to include a truck, a car, and a tractor in the bequest. She told Mr. Lawwell that this bequest should be contingent on the Catheys continuing to provide her care and that the codicil should provide that William Massey at First Farmers and Merchants National Bank in Columbia would determine whether the Catheys continued to provide the required care to Ms. Park.

These requests piqued Mr. Lawwell's interest, and he arranged a personal meeting with Ms. Park to discuss her desires. As a result of the meeting, Mr. Lawwell became concerned about Ms. Park's deteriorating physical and mental condition, as well as her dependance on Ms. Cathey. He decided to inquire further into Ms. Park's relationship with Ms. Cathey and discovered that in addition to the $500 weekly salary, Ms. Park was also bestowing substantial monetary gifts on Ms. Cathey. Ms. Park also told Mr. Lawwell that Ms. Cathey had requested the changes in her will. Notwithstanding this information and his concerns about Ms. Park's condition, Mr. Lawwell drafted the requested codicil, and it was executed by Ms. Park on December 8, 1998.

By 1999, Ms. Cathey's compensation had increased from $500 per week to $25 per hour or $95,000 per year. Ms. Park's friends and family, and even her other caregivers, noticed that Ms. Cathey's control over Ms. Park was increasing and that Ms. Cathey was actively discouraging any contact between Ms. Park and her friends and family. Ms. Park's friends and family found it difficult to reach her by telephone or to visit her at her home. Ms. Cathey would often turn visitors away, telling them that Ms. Park did not feel like having company.

Ms. Cathey also told Ms. Park that her friends and family did not really care about her and that they were only interested in her money. Despite Ms. Cathey's comments, Ms. Park contacted members of her family surreptitiously, even though Ms. Park understood that Ms. Cathey did not approve of her doing so. She talked in a low voice on the telephone to prevent Ms. Cathey from overhearing her conversations. On more than one occasion, Ms. Park requested her other caregivers to erase her Caller ID to prevent Ms. Cathey from finding out about her telephone calls and to promise that they would not tell Ms. Cathey what she was doing. When Ms. Park invited family members to visit, she cautioned them to come when Ms. Cathey was not present.

Ms. Park was hospitalized several times during 1999. In January 1999, she was admitted to the hospital with acute confusion.1 Her other health problems required several nursing home stays and an increase in her medication. Ms. Cathey took charge of administering Ms. Park's medications. During this period, Ms. Cathey wrote several "gift checks" totaling $9,000 to herself and her husband on Ms. Park's account. One of these checks — for $2,000 — was written while Ms. Park was hospitalized for congestive heart failure.

In December 1999, Ms. Park asked Mr. Lawwell to visit her at home to discuss yet another change in her will. When Mr. Lawwell visited Ms. Park on December 9, 1999, he immediately noticed a marked deterioration in her physical and mental health. When Ms. Park told him that she desired to bequeath the bulk of her estate to Ms. Cathey, Mr. Lawwell questioned her to make sure that she understood the extent of her estate and the significance of what she desired to do. Ms. Park told Mr. Lawwell that she could not remember how much she had already bequeathed to Ms. Cathey in her earlier wills. Dissatisfied with her responses, Mr. Lawwell told Ms. Park that he wanted to talk with her financial advisor before drafting revisions to her will. After Mr. Lawwell talked with Ms. Park's financial advisor, he attempted to contact Ms. Park several times. On each occasion, Ms. Cathey told Mr. Lawwell that Ms. Park was unavailable because she was resting. Ms. Park never returned Mr. Lawwell's telephone calls.

Ms. Park was again hospitalized on January 13, 2000, because of chronic renal insufficiency and angina. She had several psychological consults during this hospital stay. On January 14, 2000, Ms. Cathey contacted Tim Tisher, a lawyer practicing in Columbia, and asked him to prepare a new will for Ms. Park. Ms. Park was discharged from the hospital on January 15, 2000, and Mr. Tisher visited Ms. Park at her home three times over the next several days. Ms. Cathey was not present during these conversations; however, Mr. Tisher noticed a "baby monitor" in Ms. Park's den which enabled Ms. Cathey to hear what was going on in the room.2

Following these meetings, Mr. Tisher drafted another will for Ms. Park. This will bequeathed all but $150,0003 of her sizeable estate to Ms. Cathey. The gift to Ms. Cathey was no longer contingent on her continued care of Ms. Park, and Ms. Park named Ms. Cathey as her executrix. Ms. Park executed this will on January 25, 2000. Thereafter, Ms. Cathey continued to control Ms. Park's life and continued to write approximately $ 10,000 in "gift checks" to herself and her husband.

Ms. Park died on July 12, 2001. Five days later, Ms. Cathey filed a petition in the Chancery Court for Maury County to probate Ms. Park's January 25, 2000 w...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT