Family Trust - Mother excluded

[gagews]

Family Trust written in California.

My mother's parents updated their family trust in 2011 removing her from inheritance and naming her brother as the only recipient. It was completed through a lawyer. My grandparents were in their 90s when signing. Her brother assisted with the signing of the document because his signature is present. My grandparents have since passed away. However, I cannot think there may have been influence on her brothers part with his parents. Can the trust be contested? My mother feels bad because she has had a good relationship with her parents.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

She can certainly try, claiming she was accidentally omitted from the trust by error. When writing a will or trust it is always a good idea to specifically exclude a close family member by name or leave them a pittance so they cannot make such a claim. It appears on the surface intentional on her brothers part to take advantage of their old age..

 

[Dandy Don]

She can consult with a trust attorney to figure out if she has any options, but if the trust mentions a specific reason that she is being disinherited then it will do no good to contest. Were the grandparents mentally competent?
Where on the trust document is brother's signature (that is very odd) or for what reason would his signature be there? Contesting a trust will be costly in legal fees.

 

[curb1]

When you asked the brother about this, what did he say?

 

[tranquility]

She can consult with a trust attorney to figure out if she has any options, but if the trust mentions a specific reason that she is being disinherited then it will do no good to contest. Were the grandparents mentally competent?
Where on the trust document is brother's signature (that is very odd) or for what reason would his signature be there? Contesting a trust will be costly in legal fees.

I think the real issue is if the trust is the wishes of the grandparents more than if there is a mention of the mother. While a long time ago there was a lot of litigation about known heirs, modernly the issue is far less. There is rarely a lot wrong with belts AND suspenders, it is just that a specific exclusion is rarely the key. To me, the issue seems a potential of undue influence. The mom was IN the trust until the restatement/amendment removed her. It is going to be quite a hard row to how to claim they forgot of her in 2011.

 

[tranquility]

She can certainly try, claiming she was accidentally omitted from the trust by error. When writing a will or trust it is always a good idea to specifically exclude a close family member by name or leave them a pittance so they cannot make such a claim. It appears on the surface intentional on her brothers part to take advantage of their old age..

Yes, but, not really. If a person was in the trust and the new revision/restatement/amendment omits them, it is going to be admitted as evidence the omission was intentional. Undue influence or other such claims will be the key.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

I won't argue the point however, it is the only open door to questioning the parents ability to create such documents at their age.