UNDUE INFLUENCE
A trust, a will, or any document for transfer of interest in a real property may be contested and declared void if the person signing the document is influenced on such degree that disposition of his or her assets are different than if the person was allowed to follow his or her decision. The question is whether the affected party was unduly influenced by a third party to execute the document.
Most litigation pertaining to the undue influence are initiated after the death of party signing the document. This article deals with the issue of undue influence pertaining to creating a trust. However, the same analysis for the trust in this article also applies for a will or for any document related to transfer of interest in a real property.
Indication of undue influence may be shown by the followings:
1. Provisions that are unnatural, cutting off from any substantial bequests the natural objects of the owner’s bounty.
2. Dispositions at variance with the owner’s intentions, expressed before and after the document’s execution.
3. Relations existing between the chief beneficiaries and the owner that afforded the former an opportunity to control the decision of owner.
4. An owner whose mental and physical condition was such as to permit a subversion of his or her freedom of will.
5. A chief beneficiary under the trust who was active in procuring the execution of the instrument.
Claim of undue influence may also be shown by mental deficiency of the owner. However, showing the owner’s mental deficiency is different than showing his or her mental incapacity. As such, showing that the owner had mental deficiency to such a degree that he or she could have been influenced may be sufficient.
Claim of undue influence is generally shown by the circumstantial evidence. Circumstantial evidence must be more than mere suspicion that undue influence was used against the owner.
Generally, a petitioner has the burden of proof to show that the owner was unduly influenced. However, the burden of proof may shift to the party that has benefited from the trust if the followings are shown:
1. There was a confidential relationship between the owner and the person alleged to have exerted undue influence.
2. The person actively participated in actual preparation or execution of the trust.
3. The person unduly profited by virtue of the trust.
For more information call us at (310)553-5562.
A trust, a will, or any document for transfer of interest in a real property may be contested and declared void if the person signing the document is influenced on such degree that disposition of his or her assets are different than if the person was allowed to follow his or her decision. The question is whether the affected party was unduly influenced by a third party to execute the document.
Most litigation pertaining to the undue influence are initiated after the death of party signing the document. This article deals with the issue of undue influence pertaining to creating a trust. However, the same analysis for the trust in this article also applies for a will or for any document related to transfer of interest in a real property.
Indication of undue influence may be shown by the followings:
1. Provisions that are unnatural, cutting off from any substantial bequests the natural objects of the owner’s bounty.
2. Dispositions at variance with the owner’s intentions, expressed before and after the document’s execution.
3. Relations existing between the chief beneficiaries and the owner that afforded the former an opportunity to control the decision of owner.
4. An owner whose mental and physical condition was such as to permit a subversion of his or her freedom of will.
5. A chief beneficiary under the trust who was active in procuring the execution of the instrument.
Claim of undue influence may also be shown by mental deficiency of the owner. However, showing the owner’s mental deficiency is different than showing his or her mental incapacity. As such, showing that the owner had mental deficiency to such a degree that he or she could have been influenced may be sufficient.
Claim of undue influence is generally shown by the circumstantial evidence. Circumstantial evidence must be more than mere suspicion that undue influence was used against the owner.
Generally, a petitioner has the burden of proof to show that the owner was unduly influenced. However, the burden of proof may shift to the party that has benefited from the trust if the followings are shown:
1. There was a confidential relationship between the owner and the person alleged to have exerted undue influence.
2. The person actively participated in actual preparation or execution of the trust.
3. The person unduly profited by virtue of the trust.
For more information call us at (310)553-5562.