A man died in 2006 after a long battle with dementia. A woman attempted to probate a will the man purportedly executed on July 29, 1999. The man’s son and stepson filed caveats (objections to the will). A jury found that the will was invalid because it was the product of the woman’s undue influence and because the man lacked the mental capacity to execute a will on that date.

On appeal, the Supreme Court upheld the verdict. The woman argued that the probate court erred in admitting evidence of undue influence and lack of testamentary capacity outside of the four-months immediately preceding and following the man’s execution of the will. The court held that in Georgia there is no set four-month window for the admissibility of such evidence. Courts in Georgia have long adhered to the rule that evidence relating to undue influence or capacity to make a will is admissible if it relates to a “reasonable period of time” before and after the execution of the will. In this case, there was evidence of the woman’s two-year exploitation of the man prior to his execution of the will. The probate court was correct to let the jury hear the full story rather than isolated snippets of undue influence and mental impairment.

284 Ga. 464 (2008)