IN RE ESTATE OF REID, No. 2000-CA-00663-SCT.
| Decision Date | 30 May 2002 |
| Docket Number | No. 2000-CA-00663-SCT. |
| Parties | In The Matter of the ESTATE OF Mary L. REID, Deceased: Michael B. Cupit v. Thomas J. Pluskat. |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
825 So.2d 1
In The Matter of the ESTATE OF Mary L. REID, Deceased:Michael B. Cupit
v.
Thomas J. Pluskat
No. 2000-CA-00663-SCT.
Supreme Court of Mississippi.
May 30, 2002.
Michael Madison Taylor, Brookhaven, James D. Shannon, Hazlehurst, Kelley Mitchell Berry, Crystal Springs, attorneys for appellee.
ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
DIAZ, J., for the Court.
¶ 1. The motion for rehearing is denied. The original opinion is withdrawn, and this opinion is substituted therefor.
¶ 2. Thomas J. Pluskat filed a Petition for Letters of Administration and Other Relief in the Amite County Chancery Court seeking to set aside the attested will of Mary Lea Reid, the adoption of Michael B. Cupit by Reid, and the warranty deed executed by Reid conveying her home and land to Cupit. The chancellor set aside the will, adoption, and deed finding that they were all products of Cupit's fraud and undue influence on Reid. Cupit subsequently filed a timely appeal alleging that the chancellor erred in setting aside the deed, will and adoption and raises the following issues for consideration by this Court:
I. WHETHER THOMAS PLUSKAT WAS BARRED FROM ATTACKING THE WARRANTY DEED BY THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS AND WHETHER THE LOWER COURT ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE DEED IS VOID.
II. WHETHER THOMAS PLUSKAT HAD STANDING TO ATTACK THE ADOPTION, WAS BARRED FROM ATTACKING THE ADOPTION BY THE APPLICABLE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS AND WHETHER THE LOWER COURT ERRED IN HOLDING THAT CUPIT COMMITTED A FRAUD ON THE ADOPTION COURT.
III. WHETHER THE LOWER COURT ERRED IN FINDING THAT THE ATTESTED WILL OF MARY LEA REID IS VOID DUE TO THE UNDUE INFLUENCE OF MICHAEL CUPIT.
FACTS
¶ 3. During the summer of 1979, Michael B. Cupit, a twenty-four year old man, made an uninvited appearance at the home of Mary Lea Reid, a seventy-eight year old widow. Reid's home is located in Liberty, Mississippi and, at that time, Cupit lived in Brookhaven, Mississippi. Cupit claims that his motivation for the visit was his interest in antebellum homes and the fact that some of his relatives had sharecropped on Reid's farm in the 1920's and 1930's. Although Cupit began law school at the University of Mississippi that fall, he continued to visit Reid and developed a strong relationship with her.
¶ 4. Cupit represents the nature of his relationship with Reid as that of mother and son. However, the chancellor found that the relationship "went beyond a mother/son relationship." The chancellor based this finding, in part, on the testimony of Lorene Reid, a friend and relative of Ms. Reid. Lorene Reid testified that she was very embarrassed by Cupit's and Ms. Reid's relationship, especially their physical affection toward one another. The chancellor also considered letters that Reid wrote to Cupit in 1982 finding that they indicate "an intimate relationship of some nature between Michael Cupit and Mary Reid."
¶ 5. In March of 1982, Cupit took Reid to see Judge Mike Carr, a chancellor in Lincoln County. This trip was instigated by Cupit. Upon Judge Carr's recommendation that Cupit and Reid see a lawyer, Cupit took Reid to the law firm of Allen, Allen & Boutwell in Brookhaven, Mississippi. There they met with Raymond Boutwell. Cupit told Boutwell that he wanted to be adopted to cut off any potential heirs of Reid. Cupit also later met with
¶ 6. The day after the deed was filed, Cupit helped Reid compose a holographic will devising all of her property to him. The chancellor found that Cupit was Boutwell's client and that the contact between Cupit and Boutwell was more substantial than between Boutwell and Reid. In addition, Cupit testified that he had discussions with his fellow law students about how he could obtain Reid's property.
¶ 7. In August of 1983, Reid once again visited Allen, Allen & Boutwell. On that occasion, she was represented by Emmett Allen. She was accompanied by Cupit, but he did not participate in the discussion between Allen and Reid. Allen prepared a will for Reid and took every precaution to ensure that she was competent and no overreaching was involved. However, the chancellor found that there was undue influence and overreaching arising from "antecedent circumstances" of which Reid's attorney's could not be aware. For example, the attested will is essentially a duplicate of the holographic will Cupit helped Reid write. Due to the fact that the firm of Allen, Allen & Boutwell represented both Reid and Cupit, the chancellor found that Reid did not receive independent counsel. Also, the chancellor found that during this time Cupit was acting as Reid's attorney on other matters. Cupit wrote at least two letters in his capacity as an attorney on behalf of Reid. One letter was a reply to a man interested in buying the property and another letter was sent to a long time neighbor of Reid's warning him to stay off of the property. Cupit also transferred Reid's power of attorney to himself in 1995.
¶ 8. In 1986, Reid adopted Cupit. Gary Honea, an attorney in Magnolia, Mississippi, handled this matter.
¶ 9. The chancellor found that Cupit alienated Reid's family and friends by his territorial behavior. Although witnesses testified that Reid was proud to have Cupit as her adopted son and heir, the chancellor found that this testimony must be seen in the proper context. Those witnesses did not have the benefit of knowing the whole story. The chancellor eloquently stated his reasoning supporting his holding as follows:
The Court finds that the evidence regarding Michael Cupit's efforts to exclude most, if not all of the family members and some long-time friends of Mary Reid from her, together with Mary Reid's strong desire to have a child which she had never had, coupled with the engaging and unique personality and tendencies of Michael Cupit, as observed by the court in the evidence as well as personal observations of Mr. Cupit throughout the course of the trial, combined so as to put Mr. Cupit in a position with Mary Reid that Mr. Cupit could and did over-reach and influence Mary Reid to his advantage and her ultimate disadvantage. Mr. Cupit's influence, subtle and undetected by some of Mary Reid's friends, was used in order to gain advantage of Mary Reid and to obtain her property consisting of approximately 205 acres of land, an antebellum home that had been in her family for about 140 or so years and substantial and unique family heirlooms located within the home as well...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Swank v. Covington (In re Estate of Hemphill)
......Such gifts are presumed invalid." In re Estate of Reid, 825 So.2d 1, 3 (¶ 13) (Miss.2002). The defendants concede the existence of a confidential relationship, and the chancellor found that the evidence ......
-
In re Estate of Laughter
...create a presumption of undue influence, which Williams would then have to rebut with clear and convincing evidence. In re Estate of Reid, 825 So.2d 1, 5 (Miss.2002) (citing In re Estate of Dabney, 740 So.2d 915, 921 ¶ 31. A confidential relationship is "a relationship between two people in......
-
Stacks v. Smith
...powers" authorize it to grant such relief separate and apart from Rule 60(b). Id. at 477 (¶14).¶17. Similarly, in In re Estate of Reid , 825 So. 2d 1 (Miss. 2002), the Supreme Court recognized that "courts have the inherent power to vacate a judgment at a subsequent term of court when the j......
-
In re Estate of Summerlin
...the other because of the latter's dependency on the former arising either from weakness of mind or body, or through trust[.]" In re Estate of Reid, 825 So.2d 1, 5(¶ 13) (Miss.2002) (quoting Hendricks v. James, 421 So.2d 1031, 1041 (Miss.1982) (overruled in part on other grounds)). "The burd......