## Facts

- Donna Mae Kurrle executed a will and a corresponding quitclaim deed that transferred all of her property to one of her sons, Jeffrey Kamidoi, and left her other two sons nothing.
- For approximately 13 years before Kurrle’s death, Jeffrey lived with her.
- During that time, Kurrle made Jeffrey a joint holder on her bank account.
- Kurrle also granted Jeffrey a financial power of attorney.
- At the time the will and deed were signed, Kurrle’s mental condition was impaired.
- Jeffrey arranged for a notary and a witness for the signing and was present when Kurrle executed the documents.
- After the signing, Jeffrey did not disclose to other family members that Kurrle had executed the will and deed.
- Witnesses later reported that Jeffrey manipulated Kurrle into signing the documents.
- After Kurrle’s death, Brian Kamidoi (one of the disinherited sons) petitioned the probate court to set aside the will and the quitclaim deed on the ground of undue influence.
- The probate court granted the petition and set aside the challenged documents.
- Jeffrey appealed to the Michigan Court of Appeals.

## Issues

1. Whether the probate court erred by setting aside Donna Mae Kurrle’s will and quitclaim deed on the ground that Jeffrey Kamidoi procured them through undue influence.
2. Whether the probate court’s findings supporting undue influence (including any presumption arising from a confidential or fiduciary relationship and Jeffrey’s role in the transaction) were clearly erroneous.

## Decision

- The Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed the probate court’s order setting aside the will and quitclaim deed.
- The court held that the record supported the probate court’s determination that the instruments were the product of undue influence.
- The court concluded that evidence of Jeffrey’s position of trust and control over Kurrle’s financial affairs, his involvement in arranging and attending the execution, Kurrle’s impaired mental condition, and the surrounding circumstances supported the probate court’s ruling.

## Legal Principles

- Undue influence may invalidate a will or an inter vivos conveyance, including a deed, when the challenger shows that the document reflects the influencer’s intent rather than the transferor’s free choice.
- A presumption of undue influence may arise when (a) a confidential or fiduciary relationship exists, (b) the fiduciary benefits from the transaction, and (c) the fiduciary had an opportunity to influence the grantor or testator.
- Evidence that a beneficiary with financial power of attorney actively participated in procuring testamentary or property-transfer documents—especially where the transferor’s mental condition is impaired—can support a finding of undue influence.
- Appellate review generally gives deference to the probate court’s factual findings; the reviewing court will not disturb findings that are supported by the record.

## Conclusion

In *In re Estate of Kurrle*, the Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed the probate court’s decision to set aside Donna Mae Kurrle’s will and quitclaim deed because the evidence supported a finding of undue influence by Jeffrey Kamidoi, who held a position of trust, participated in procuring the documents, and received all of Kurrle’s property to the exclusion of her other sons.


In re Estate of Kurrle, No. 295841, 2011 WL 1198198 (2011)