concurring.
I concur subject to the following caveat. The majority opinion declines to adopt the reasoning contained in Womack v. Wom-ack (1992) 1st Dist.Ind.App., 605 N.E.2d 221, as opposed to the contrary reasoning set forth in McClamroch v. McClamroch (1985) 4th Dist. Ind.App., 476 N.E.2d 514. I would adopt the reasoning in the Wom-ack case. Accordingly, I find it unnecessary to assume facts which would give rise to a rebuttal presumption of undue influence.