Miami Rescue Mission (943 So. 2d 274 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) FACTS: T (Mrs. Manucy) executed a new will while in the hospital with severe pain and under the influence of a strong medication. She died the next day. The new will disinherited Ts longtime caretaker and friend (Caretaker) and left her estate to several charities.

CONTEST FOR INSANE DELUSION: Caretaker asserted that T was suffering from an insane delusion at the time the will was executed and that she thus lacked testamentary capacity. Ts personality changed abruptly about 4 days before her death (e.g., didnt recognize Caretaker any longer, her doctors and nurses became concerned, and her psychiatrist thought she was hallucinating or delusional) and she was heavily medicated. Ts alleged delusions: Caretaker abandoned her [Caretaker visited her daily]; Let her dog die [dog was still alive]; and Was stealing from her [not true].

DEF. OF INSANE DELUSION: a spontaneous conception and acceptance as a fact of that which has no real existence except in imagination. The conception must be persistently adhered to against all evidence and reason. NO REAL EXISTENCE: delusion must be subject to disproof by demonstrative evidence. Generally, courts will not apply doctrine to religious or spiritual beliefs, the truth of which cannot be proved or disproved.

MUST HAVE CAUSATION: Contestant must show a causal link between the delusion and the execution of the will. In other words, T would not have executed the will in this way, but for the insane delusion. * T may believe things that you and I might think are delusional (e.g., T thinks she can speak to dead people, space aliens are conspiring to take over the world, etc.), but if these beliefs dont affect how T disposes of her estate, theres no insane delusion to invalidate the will.

NO RATIONAL BASIS FOR BELIEFS: Court found that T had no rational basis for believing that her Caretaker abandoned her, stole from her, or mistreated her dog (to the contrary, the witnesses and evidence supported the position that Caretaker visited the decedent in the hospital every day and Caretaker gave credible testimony that she was continuing to care for the dog). Court found very persuasive the testimony of Ts physicians regarding Ts medication that T was taking and how it had changed her personality. Thus, court invalidated the will T executed one day before her death.

RARE CASE: This case is rare because courts tend to find a rational basis, however slight, for the testators actions. In order words, instances where a court invalidates a will based on insane delusion.

UNANSWERED QUESTIONS: Why did Ts attorney draft up the new will? Who witnessed it?