Florida Statute 90.304
“Presumption affecting the burden of proof defined”
What it means
Florida's Evidence Code sorts civil presumptions into two bins. Presumptions of mere procedural convenience (§90.303) vanish once credible contrary evidence appears. This section is the other bin: all rebuttable presumptions not defined in §90.303 are presumptions affecting the burden of proof. A burden-shifting presumption doesn't evaporate — the party it operates against must actually disprove the presumed fact.
In probate this is the live wire: §733.107(2) places the undue-influence presumption in this category, because it implements public policy against abuse of fiduciary and confidential relationships.
- In civil actions, every rebuttable presumption not defined in §90.303 affects the burden of proof.
- A burden-shifting presumption does not vanish on contrary evidence — the opposing party must disprove the presumed fact.
- §733.107(2) declares the probate undue-influence presumption a burden-shifting presumption under this section.
- Presumptions implementing public policy — protecting against abuse of confidential relationships — are the classic examples.
How it plays out
When the undue-influence presumption arises — confidential relationship, substantial benefit, active procurement — this section is why the fight changes shape. The beneficiary doesn't just need an innocent explanation; the burden of proof itself moves, and the will's defender must carry it. We walk clients on both sides of a contest through this early, because whichever party bears the burden on undue influence usually learns how strong everyone's settlement position really is.