Estate of Shapiro CA4/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 30, 2015G050036California5,197 words

Opinion

Opinion

INTRODUCTION

Daniel Shapiro appeals from the judgment following his unsuccessful will and trust contest and from the subsequent denial of his motion for new trial. Estate planning documents prepared in 2011 for Daniel’s father, Marvin Shapiro, disinherited Daniel, Marvin’s sole surviving child, in favor of a trust of which Marvin’s second wife, 1 Jeanne, was trustee. Daniel challenged the will and the trust on grounds of undue 2 influence exercised by Jeanne and of lack of capacity. The trial court found in Jeanne’s favor and denied Daniel’s subsequent motion for a new trial. We affirm both the judgment and the order denying the motion for new trial. Daniel’s claims of error boil down mainly to disagreements with the trial court’s findings of fact. These findings rest on substantial evidence, and we do not, at the appellate level, reweigh evidence. The remaining issues involve the exercise of the trial court’s discretion, which we find was not abused.

FACTS

Marvin was diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease in 2006. He was followed by a neurologist, who saw him every few months, noting Marvin’s gradual decline. In late 2010, Marvin’s condition abruptly worsened, and an MRI disclosed…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.