In the context of the deceased's insistence on her wishes, the objector testified about a conversation between the deceased and her deceased son that took place in his presence after the will was drawn up as follows: "There was a pleasant conversation until the point where my father actually asked her for one simple thing, not as they write and not as they say, I was present and I heard, a really short sentence, a really legitimate sentence that he just wants to know, not what she has, to whom she gives what she has to how she dies. This is the most basic thing. He didn't force her to go and he didn't force her to make an inheritance, not anything. My grandmother has to come to one of these once, a woman is a bit difficult, right? And she doesn't have that many emotions so she told him that... S... And that was already after the will, now it turns out. She told him that she didn't, didn't do anything and didn't say anything, so he told her 'Mom, after you go to your world there will be knife fights' I won't forget that sentence, so she said like this and with her hand 'make knives and fight', that's what happened in this one-on-one conversation and that's it. It was in this conversation from that moment on it was very, very hurtful to my father, very much hurt him, and the disconnect actually began, so the disconnect was created..." (pp. 31, 22-32, pp. 32, 1-3 of the minutes of the hearing of June 9, 2022). The objector testified that afterwards the deceased did not speak to his father, the deceased son, nor to him himself (ibid., pp. 34, 22-23), although later he testified that the contact between him and the deceased was severed only upon her death, and that he was the last to see her before her death, after he claimed that none of her children bothered to visit her (p. 38, 30-32 of the minutes of the hearing of June 9, 2022).
The description of the conversation by the objector supports the manner in which the deceased's image is portrayed, as stated above, as a very opinionated and very independent woman, certainly from a mental point of view, at the time of the drafting of the will and afterwards.
- As mentioned Scope of Assistance The deceased's receipt was limited mainly to her transportation or for the purpose of handling bureaucratic matters and documents. Moreover, the testimony of the objector indicates that the help and assistance given to the deceased Given by all of her children, Thus, if there was any assistance or dependence of any kind, it was in general the children of the deceased and not in the plaintiffs or any of them specifically.
Thus, the objector testified that all of the deceased's children assisted her at various stages of her life. The objector testified that all of the deceased's children had an influence on the deceased (p. 59, paras. 25-26 of the minutes of the hearing of 09.06.2022). The objector testified that she herself assisted the deceased in medical matters, the deceased's son financed taxis for the deceased for a certain period of time, and that although she claimed that the deceased was dependent on the plaintiff, she was not financially dependent on him, but according to her, this stemmed from the fact that the plaintiff was named after the deceased's father and the objector was named after the deceased's mother (pp. 43, 21-22, 32, pp. 44, 1-11 of the minutes of the hearing of June 9, 2022). The objector testified that the plaintiff used to go with the deceased to the bank and that she herself accompanied her to the bank once to close funds according to her advice (pp. 45, 17-19, pp. 47, 25-32 of the minutes of the hearing of June 9, 2022). These testimonies show an emotional connection to both the plaintiff and the objector and the assistance of the plaintiff and the objector, as well as of the deceased son, without laying a factual basis for the existence of dependence on the plaintiff specifically.