The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Dora died and left a will that named her son Rood and her daughter Estelle as co-executors. Rood objected to provisions in the will claiming that Newberg, Estelle's son, and Dora's grandson used undue influence and fraud to obtain the proceeds of four bank accounts. The trial court found both fraud and undue influence. The judge found that Dora was stubborn and narrow-minded and that if someone wronged her, she would not forgive them. The judge ruled that Newberg was in a position of trust and that he had violated that relationship by failing to correct Dora's mistaken belief that Rood had taken items from her safe deposit box when in fact Newberg had moved them from the box. This appeal resulted.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.