Published Oct 17, 20256 minute readcape breton court-3_299228332.jpegArticle contentA Cape Breton man who claimed his uncle pressured his mother into giving him two classic cars before she died has lost his case in court.THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY.Subscribe now to access this story and more:Unlimited access to the website and appExclusive access to premium content, newsletters and podcastsFull access to the e-Edition app, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment onEnjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalistsSupport local journalists and the next generation of journalistsSUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES.Subscribe or sign in to your account to continue your reading experience.Unlimited access to the website and appExclusive access to premium content, newsletters and podcastsFull access to the e-Edition app, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment onEnjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalistsSupport local journalists and the next generation of journalistsRegister to unlock more articles.Create an account or sign in to continue your reading experience.Access additional stories every monthShare your thoughts and join the conversation in our commenting communityGet email updates from your favourite authorsSign In or Create an AccountorArticle contentJoey Forrest filed an application in the Probate Court of Nova Scotia to have the transfer of two vehicles by his mother, Dorothy Darlene Forrest, to her youngest brother Ernie Devoe declared an invalid gift.Article contentArticle contentJust over two months before she died on May 5, 2023, Dorothy Forrest sold a 1938 Chevrolet Sedan Deluxe and a 1957 Chevrolet Belair to Devoe for $1,000.Article contentArticle contentThe antique automobiles, which were collectively valued at $27,000, were among the major assets were Dorothy Forrest had outlined in her will, along with the family home and vacant land adjacent to the family home.Article contentThe will, dated Oct. 27, 2022, appointed Ernie Devoe and her only child, Joey Forrest, to be co-executors. The will stated that “…the rest of the residue” of her estate would pass to her son.Article contentThe lawyer who prepared the will, Andrea Rizzato, testified during the two-day hearing that with regard to vehicles, her practice would be to tell a client to “go to Access Nova Scotia to add someone to title so there would be no probate later. She added that Dorothy Forrest asked for Ernie Devoe to be a co-executor and alternate beneficiary. She stated, “it seemed pretty standard to me, name your only child first and someone you trust second.”Article contentArticle contentRizzato, who was directed by the court to waive solicitor-client privilege to answer relevant questions, disclosed that her notes included, “son will go to Access Nova Scotia to add his name …I’m going to do a Deed to add Joey …everything to Joey.”Article contentRizzato said although Dorothy Forrest “was physically unwell,” there was no issue with her capacity when she signed the deed documents on April 27, 2023.Article content‘BAMBOOZLED’Article contentJoey Forrest’s evidence consisted of affidavits filed by six other family members who stated Dorothy Forrest was very close to her only child had let it be known that when she died he would get everything, including the cars.Article contentHis mother’s twin brother, Donald Devoe, recalled that Joey Forrest’s late father gifted his nephew “the red classic car” shortly after he graduated from high school.Article contentThe evidence given by Joey Forrest and other family members asserted that Ernie Devoe and his wife Leisa Devoe were not overly close with Dorothy Forrest and that the couple was “forceful and domineering” with her while she was in hospital. It was also stated that in the days before Dorothy Forrest’s death there was an incident that led to Ernie Devoe being taken away from the hospital in handcuffs by police and that within days of Dorothy Forrest’s death, Ernie Devoe removed the cars from her garage.Article contentDonald Devoe’s wife, Nancy Devoe, maintained that on her death bed, Dorothy Forrest told her that she just realized that Ernie Devoe had “bamboozled” her. She produced notes that she said Dorothy Forrest wrote out in her presence on April 29, 2023.Article contentWith respect to the vehicles, one of the first note read:Article content“Joey if you have to sell it [the cars, according to Nancy Devoe] to pay my bills off 57 but you won’t have to”Article contentThe second note read:Article content“Joey if you have to sell the 57 to pay my bills off but you won’t have to”Article contentNancy Devoe testified that Dorothy Forrest wrote the second note because she was “not pleased with her penmanship” on the first note.Article contentOn cross-examination Joey Forrest acknowledged that neither vehicle had ever been put in his name. He agreed that the cars were exclusively owned by his mother from 2019 until 2023 and that he had only driven one of the cars when his father was alive.Article contentArticle contentHe said “from talking to mom I knew the vehicles were in Ernie’s name” but maintained “he was just holding them for me until mom passed.”Article contentOFFERED TO SELLArticle contentErnie and Leisa Devoe gave evidence that they were close with Dorothy Forrest and frequently visited her in her home and after she was hospitalized.Article contentThey said that Dorothy Forrest did not want her son to have the vehicles because she knew he would sell them and that on Feb. 24, 2023, she offered to sell Ernie Devoe each of the cars for $500.Article contentOn cross-examination both Leisa Devoe and Ernie Devoe denied Dorothy Forrest was in a vulnerable state at the material times.Article contentErnie Devoe testified that he removed the cars from Dorothy Forrest’s garage in the days leading up to her death because he was concerned about Joey Forrest’s mother-in-law damaging the vehicles.Article contentIn his decision, Nova Scotia Supreme Court Justice James L. Chipman said he found Nancy Devoe’s reference to Ernie Devoe “bamboozling” Dorothy Forrest to lack credibility.Article contentArticle content“No other witness attempted to quote Dorothy as saying anything remotely akin to this. Indeed, Nancy herself made no reference to this allegation in her affidavit. Given all of the written and documentary evidence I categorically reject Nancy Devoe’s evidence in this area,” Chipman wrote.Article contentHe also expressed concerns with Joey Forrest’s evidence that his mother told him the cars were given to Ernie Devoe for safekeeping and that they would ultimately go to him.Article content“Given the totality of the evidence, including the documents demonstrating that title to the two cars was signed over by Dorothy to Ernie in late February, 2023, I cannot reconcile how Joey maintained that his mother intended the cars would go him,” Chipman wrote before addressing the question of whether the 1938 Chevrolet Sedan Deluxe was gifted to Joey Forrest after he graduated from high school.Article content“As acknowledged by Joey during cross-examination, neither of the cars were transferred into Joey’s name. Further, the cars were never delivered to the Applicant as his property. Given that the gift was never perfected in the lifetime of Joey’s late father, the gift of the 1938 Chevrolet Sedan Deluxe must fail. Since the gift was never perfected, there is no weight to the argument that the deceased was holding the vehicle in trust for Joey.”Article contentNO UNDUE INFLUENCEArticle contentChipman concluded that Joey Forrest failed to demonstrate that Ernie Devoe used undue influence on his mother before she sold him the cars.Article content“Joey alleges undue influence over Dorothy which caused the sale of the vehicles. The Applicant further argues that there is a presumption of undue influence that Ernie is required to rebut,” he wrote.Article content“In order for the presumption to apply, the party contesting the gift must first demonstrate that there was a relationship of trust or influence between the donor and the donee. Given the evidence, I have determined that Joey has failed to demonstrate this relationship. Accordingly, Joey must demonstrate that there was a dominant relationship or a relationship of influence between Ernie and Dorothy. Given the totality of the evidence, I find that this has not been established. Ernie was the youngest sibling of Dorothy. The overall evidence shows that he provided assistance but that Dorothy did not rely on him for her daily needs. It is apparent from all of the evidence that the relationship Ernie had with Dorothy did not meet the level of influence to trigger the presumption.”Article contentArticle contentVALID GIFTArticle contentChipman said the notes of sale, transfer certificates and receipts issued in late February 2023 demonstrate the intention of Dorothy Forrest to transfer the vehicles to Ernie Devoe.Article content“On all of the evidence it is apparent that the nominal sale price of the two vehicles was a validly given gift. I find that Dorothy, based on the documents she signed, had a clear intention to give the cars to Ernie. The presumption of capacity applies and, even if it did not apply in this case, I find that Dorothy had capacity at the time the cars were sold to Ernie for $1,000.00. It is also clear that Ernie accepted the gifts by signing the necessary documents. The gifts were validly delivered to Ernie as Dorothy provided the signed ownership documents to him and because he took possession of the vehicles.”Article contentAs a result, Chipman dismissed the application.Article contentArticle content
Classic car dispute drives Cape Breton family to court
