Miami Rescue Mission (943 So. 2d 274 (Fla.

3d DCA 2006)

FACTS:
o T (Mrs. Manucy) executed a new will while in the hospital with severe pain and
under the influence of a strong medication. She died the next day. The new will
disinherited Ts longtime caretaker and friend (Caretaker) and left her estate to
several charities.

CONTEST FOR INSANE DELUSION:

o Caretaker asserted that T was suffering from an insane delusion at the time the
will was executed and that she thus lacked testamentary capacity. Ts personality
changed abruptly about 4 days before her death (e.g., didnt recognize Caretaker
any longer, her doctors and nurses became concerned, and her psychiatrist
thought she was hallucinating or delusional) and she was heavily medicated. Ts
alleged delusions:
Caretaker abandoned her [Caretaker visited her daily];
Let her dog die [dog was still alive]; and
Was stealing from her [not true].

DEF. OF INSANE DELUSION: a spontaneous conception and acceptance as a

fact of that which has no real existence except in imagination . The
conception must be persistently adhered to against all evidence and reason.
o NO REAL EXISTENCE: delusion must be subject to disproof by demonstrative
evidence. Generally, courts will not apply doctrine to religious or spiritual beliefs,
the truth of which cannot be proved or disproved.

MUST HAVE CAUSATION:

o Contestant must show a causal link between the delusion and the execution of the
will. In other words, T would not have executed the will in this way, but for the
insane delusion.
* T may believe things that you and I might think are delusional (e.g., T
thinks she can speak to dead people, space aliens are conspiring to take over
the world, etc.), but if these beliefs dont affect how T disposes of her estate,
theres no insane delusion to invalidate the will.

NO RATIONAL BASIS FOR BELIEFS:

o Court found that T had no rational basis for believing that her Caretaker
abandoned her, stole from her, or mistreated her dog (to the contrary, the
witnesses and evidence supported the position that Caretaker visited the
decedent in the hospital every day and Caretaker gave credible testimony that
she was continuing to care for the dog). Court found very persuasive the
testimony of Ts physicians regarding Ts medication that T was taking and how it
had changed her personality. Thus, court invalidated the will T executed one day
before her death.

RARE CASE:
o This case is rare because courts tend to find a rational basis, however slight, for
the testators actions. In order words, instances where a court invalidates a will
based on insane delusion.

UNANSWERED QUESTIONS:

o Why did Ts attorney draft up the new will? Who witnessed it?