Image Credit: The Keleher Appellate Law Group
In January 2019, Marshall Ricker emailed his nephew’s father, asking that the nephew move to Tennessee, live with him, help him and receive $2,000 a month. On March 13, 2020, with a notary present at his nursing home and the nephew on the telephone from Washington, he signed a deed making himself and his nephew joint owners with survivorship rights, so the survivor takes the whole home. A homeowner living with Alzheimer’s disease signed a deed giving his nephew survivorship rights to his home, and his sister, who held his power of attorney, sued to undo it.
Published by Justia, the homeowner was Marshall Ricker, an architect who needed extensive daily care as he aged, first from his sister, Linda Ricker, according to the written opinion of the Tennessee Court of Appeals. After a trial and an appeal, the Tennessee Court of Appeals decided the deed stands as written. When a family member with a serious illness changes who inherits his house, relatives sometimes fight over whether the decision was truly his own. A Tennessee case shows how courts weigh that question. Here’s what happened, how the judges analysed mental capacity and undue influence, and why the survivorship language mattered. Her son, Clark Blumenstein, lived in Washington state. He named his sister sole heir and executrix in his will that April and gave her power of attorney that September.
Why the sister’s claims of undue influence and a confidential relationship failed against the nephew
Linda Ricker argued that her son had effectively become her brother’s caregiver, creating a confidential relationship and a presumption of undue influence. In Tennessee, such a relationship, followed by a benefit to the dominant person, can shift the burden to that person to prove fairness by clear and convincing evidence. The trial court found that Linda Ricker, not her son, was the caregiver, and the appeals court found the record supported that conclusion, noting she held her brother’s power of attorney and led his care. Helping a relative carry out his wishes, the judges wrote, does not automatically turn an ordinary family relationship into a confidential one. Blumenstein testified that the move and the deed were his uncle’s purposeful, independent decisions and that he facilitated rather than controlled them. The panel affirmed the finding of no undue influence.