Initially, the proponent of the contested will has the burden of presenting proof that the will was executed in compliance with all of the formalities of law. In re Estate of Eden , 99 S.W.3d 82, 88 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1995). When the contested will is a written document with subscribing witnesses, it must be proved by all living witnesses, "if to be found."
Construction of a will, including whether an heir has been disinherited, is a question of law for the court. In re Estate of Eden, 99 S.W.3d 82, 91 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1995) (citing McDonald v. Ledford, 140 Tenn. 471, 477-78, 205 S.W. 312, 314 (Tenn. 1918); Presley v. Hanks, 782 S.W.2d 482, 487 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1989)).
In considering this issue, we review the trial court's findings of fact de novo with a presumption of correctness, unless the evidence in the record preponderates otherwise. Tenn. R. App. P. 13(d); In the Estate of Blackburn, 253 S.W.3d 603, 612 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007); Lee v. Gilliam (In re Estate of Meade), 156 S.W.3d 841, 843 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004); see also In re Estate of Eden, 99 S.W.3d 82, 87 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1995). Questions of law are reviewed de novo, according no presumption of correctness to the trial court's conclusions of law.
The chancellor granted a motion to dismiss, observing that "the Legislature [n]ever intended to allow courts to birth children by legitimation and use this fiction to place them within the means of the pretermitted child's statute." After concluding as fact that the Decedent knew about his relationship to the Petitioner, the chancellor relied on the ruling in In re Estate of Eden, 99 S.W.3d 82 (Tenn.Ct.App. 1995), in which the Court of Appeals held that a testator who specifically left his property to named individuals disinherited his other heirs by implication, to conclude that the Petitioner was not entitled to inherit from the Decedent. Id. at 93.
In re Est. of Link, 542 S.W.3d 438, 451 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2017). When a will contest is filed, "[t]he proponents of the will have the initial burden of proving that the will was duly executed."In re Est. of Eden, 99 S.W.3d 82, 88 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1995). "When the contested will is a written document with subscribing witnesses, it must be proved by all living witnesses, 'if to be found.'" In re Est. of Link, 542 S.W.3d at 452 (quoting Tenn. Code Ann. § 32-4-105).
Ct. App. 1993)]; Taliaferro v. Green, 622 S.W.2d 829, 835 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1981).In re Estate of Eden, 99 S.W.3d 82, 88 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1995). In its order finding the Holographic Will to be valid, the trial court stated in pertinent part:
We note that the trial court declined to consider the issues of res judicata and claim preclusion because it first determined that Personal Representative did not satisfy her initial burden to demonstrate that the Instrument was a duly executed will. See In re Estate of Eden, 99 S.W.3d 82, 88 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1995) ("The proponents of the will have the initial burden of proving that the will was duly executed."). In its March 20, 2020 order, the trial court stated:
Thus, following that opinion, the parties were, and still are, at the threshold of a will contest proceeding. It is thus incumbent on them, under the trial court's direction, to formulate the issues remaining to be tried. Tenn. Code Ann. § 32-4-104 (2007); In re Estate of Eden, 99 S.W.3d 82, 88 (Tenn.Ct.App. 1995); 1 Pritchard § 359, at 516-17. In addition to Ms. Boote's contest, the Boote daughters have asserted on several prior occasions during this litigation that they may contest not only the third codicil but also the first two codicils.
Will contests typically involve factual questions which are submitted to a jury, while will constructions involve matters of law for the court. It is important for trial courts to "determine initially whether a particular controversy involves issues of contest or construction or both." In re Estate of Eden, 99 S.W.3d 82, 87 (Tenn.Ct.App. 1995). In Eden, a panel of this court instructed as follows:
While will contests involve factual questions to be resolved by a trier of fact, will constructions involve questions of law left for resolution by the court. In re Estate of Eden, 99 S.W.3d 82, 87 (Tenn.Ct.App. 1995). Accordingly, a probate court's construction of a will includes conclusions of law which we review de novo with no presumption of correctness.