The credible testimony of a reputable attorney who had known the decedent for many years created a presumption of the absence of undue influence. Conflicting testimony as to the health and mental state of the decedent was insufficient to establishe weakened intellect, an increase in a share of the estate by only 8% was not a substantial benefit, and the grant of a power of attorney was not a confidential relationship when the decedent continued to manage his own financial affairs and the agent only used the power to pay a bill and to pay for hospice care after the will was signed. Roche Estate, 1 Fid.Rep.4th 487 (Luzerne O.C. 2022), aff’d, 1377 MDA 2022 (Pa. Super. 10/27/2023).