Disputes and contests

Undue influence and help from family

In New York, Matter of Sook Li distinguishes mere persuasion from coercion that restrains independent action, destroys free agency or overcomes the person's free will. Its stated elements are motive, opportunity and actual exercise of undue influence.

Affection, family attachment, a desire to gratify another and remembered kindness are distinguished from that coercion. Substantial circumstantial evidence may establish undue influence. Other states differ.

In that case, conflicting evidence about care, financial assistance and preparation of the will required trial of the undue influence objection. The decision supplies no universal exemption for helping a parent or providing care.

Trustee conduct and beneficiary interests

In Minnesota, for example, a trustee accepting office must administer in good faith according to the trust's terms, purposes, beneficiary interests and applicable law. Other states differ.

The trustee owes loyalty and cannot place personal interests above beneficiary interests. With two or more beneficiaries, administration must be impartial, giving due regard to their respective interests.

Prudent administration considers the trust's purposes, terms, distribution requirements and all relevant circumstances. It requires reasonable care, skill and caution.

Trust terms generally govern the statutory default rules, but cannot override the duty to act in good faith according to the trust's terms, purposes and beneficiary interests.

Who has an interest in a probate proceeding

In Minnesota, for example, probate interested persons include heirs, devisees, children, spouses, creditors, beneficiaries and others whose property rights or estate claims may be affected by the proceeding. Other states differ.

The definition also includes people with priority for appointment as personal representative and fiduciaries representing interested persons. Its meaning depends on the particular purpose and matter involved in the proceeding.

Being a spouse or adult child does not establish entitlement to every remedy.

Records and questions to organize

Use these prompts to prepare a focused discussion:

• Which document versions and signing dates are involved?
• Who witnessed execution, and what correspondence concerns preparation?
• Which medical records might address the person's condition when the will was signed?
• What beneficiary interests, trustee accounts, reports and notices need review?
• Who would participate in a proposed settlement, and what authority would each participant have?

In New York, Matter of Sook Li illustrates consideration of medical records, prior wills, correspondence, payment evidence and witness testimony. These prompts do not establish a right to obtain records. Other states differ.

Two related terms

• Testamentary capacity

  Testamentary capacity means capacity to make a will.

• No contest clause

  A no contest clause is a provision purporting to penalize a challenge or specified proceeding.

EstatePlanner.com resources to open next

• How capacity to sign estate planning documents is evaluated

  Open this guide if your concern centers on the signer's understanding. It covers capacity questions for estate documents and helps focus your discussion on the document involved.

• How standing and deadlines shape estate and trust disputes

  Use this guide to organize questions about who may participate and which timing rules need review. Keep the notices and proceeding information beside you as you read.

• How disputes over trustee conduct work

  Choose this guide when your concern involves administration, investment decisions or information from a trustee. Bring the trust terms and accounts into that discussion.

• Estate dispute records and questions checklist

  Use the checklist to assemble document versions, witness information, reports and notices before a professional review. Record what you have and what still needs to be discussed.

An investor perspective on disputes

A panel participant describes partnership disputes among the complications encountered when reviewing distressed investments. For an owner, this offers business context for organizing questions about private assets alongside an estate review.

"so we're comfortable with looking outside the box on some of these deals that potential problems violations uh partnership disputes bankruptcy we understand that field and I think that's why we've been getting more and more deal flow as the yields have progressed"

Frequently asked questions

• Can someone with dementia sign a valid will?

  Progressive dementia alone does not preclude testamentary capacity under New York's Matter of Sook Li, but capacity does not resolve separate execution or undue influence requirements. Other states differ.

  The New York test asks whether the person generally understands making the will and its consequences, the nature and extent of the property disposed of, and the natural objects of their bounty.

  Capacity concerns the time of execution. Earlier or later evidence matters only insofar as it bears on the person's mind at that exact time.

  The opinion recognizes a lucid interval even during an ongoing diagnosis of mental illness or progressive dementia. It addresses will capacity, rather than a standard for every estate document.

  The court dismissed the capacity objection but left execution and undue influence issues unresolved. It did not thereby admit the will.

• Does a no contest clause always penalize a will challenge?

  No. In Minnesota, for example, a will provision penalizing an interested person for contesting the will or bringing another estate proceeding is unenforceable if probable cause exists to institute proceedings. Other states differ.

  The statute does not define probable cause, equate it with subjective good faith or require success. This rule concerns the specified will provision and proceedings, rather than every trust clause or automatic protection for accounting requests.

• Can a trust settlement bind people without initial court approval?

  In Minnesota, for example, yes, if all required interested persons participate directly or through valid representation, the agreement respects material trust purposes, and its terms could properly receive court approval. Other states differ.

  Interested persons are those whose consent would be required for a binding settlement approved by a court.

  Permitted subjects include interpretation, reports or accounts, trustee directions or powers, trustee changes and compensation, administration location and trustee liability.

  Any interested person may request court approval and review of representation adequacy and permissible terms. This trust settlement rule is distinct from a probate compromise approved in a formal court proceeding.

• Does a trust automatically pay every party's litigation fees?

  No. In Minnesota, for example, a court may award costs and expenses, including reasonable attorney fees, to any party from the trust in a judicial administration proceeding as justice and equity require. Other states differ.

  The award is discretionary. It does not guarantee payment of every litigant's fees.