Although the decedent’s business advisor received no direct benefit from the decedent’s will (which named him as the executor and testamentary trustee), he received a collateral benefit from being named the trustee of a discretionary charitable trust, and so a presumption of undue influence would arise except that the decedent’s estrangement from, and hostility towards, his wife and her sons provided an independent basis for his will. It was error for the Orphans’ Court not to remove the business advisor as executor because of his conflict of interest in filing a notice of claim, complaint, and confession of judgment against the estate. In re: Estate of Robert J. Rosemeier, 1502 MDA 2021 (Pa. Super. 7/18/2023) (non-precedential).

[DBE Comment: How did the surviving spouse have standing to continue to seek the removal of the executor when she was not a beneficiary of the will and had waived her right to elect against the will, and so was not a beneficiary of the estate? Should the issue of removal have become moot when the probate of the will was upheld, or did the court still have the power and duty to act to protect the interests of the charitable beneficiaries?]