What is the name of your state?What is the name of your state? New York
A. loses her beloved husband of 50+ years. They have an only daughter B, who lives several thousand miles away, from where the family hails, has a house full of children, a busy career, and is going through a difficult pregnancy at the time of her father's death. A. and her husband had made wills together 10 years previously, in which they bequeath all they have to the survivng spouse, and in the event the spouse predeceases them, leave everything the the daughter. A.'s husband was always clearly the dominant of the two, making all the major financial decisions, and recently had expressed to various relatives the concern that A. at times becomes confused and forgetful.
A.'s husband's deathbed wish was to be buried in the church in the family's old hometown. A. notifies various relatives of this development. Almost immediately, Fourth Cousin Iago, a divorced, childless man who had a friendly relationship with the couple and rents their old house from them, hops on a plane, escorts A. on the plane and attends the funeral service. He also offers A. a place in his house (actually her house) to stay a while, and then escorts her back on the plane home "just to settle her affairs and collect her belongings before she moves back, permanently". He ends up sticking to A. like a barnacle, moving in with her into her house and claiming all the while she needs care and nobody else bothers ith her anyway. Her daughter, unable to fly because she is now heavily pregnant, senses he mother is becoming more and more attached to Iago and is troubled, but can do very little about it long-distance.
A few months later, A. dies. Iago immediately produces a will, dated 1 month after A.'s husband's death, in which she bequeaths all she owns to...Iago, of course. The atorney-draftsman is a personal friend of Iago's, and the witnesses are the attorney's secretary and his law partner. There is also a clause in the will that specifically disinherits the daughter, "for reasons best known to her and wich I shall not go into as not to publically embarrass her". Iago and his lawyer claim A. stated to them the reason for this was because the daugher didn't go rushing out to help her mother like Iago did, and A. had been helpless until Iago came and took over, arranged the funeral and held A.'s hand on the plane.
The daughter subesquently finds out that:
1. Around the time the will was drawn up (before and after), Iago and A. went into various banks, where they proceeded to put all of A.'s money into joint bank accounts with rights of survivorship;
2. Upon enquiry at the funeral home, it seems A. had arranged and paid for the funeral and flying the body "back home" all by herself, and the funeral home director had never dealt with, nor even met, Cousin Iago. So the reason supposedly given by Iago and his lawyer-friend for A. changing her will (at a particularly vulnerable time in her life, it must be said), is demostrably false.
So--
Is the will Iago procured (or is assumed to have procured) a product of undue influence, fraud, both or neither? Given the facts, would you say the daughter has a chance of not being totally disinherited (i.e, having both the will reversed and the money in the JTWROS' returned)?
A. loses her beloved husband of 50+ years. They have an only daughter B, who lives several thousand miles away, from where the family hails, has a house full of children, a busy career, and is going through a difficult pregnancy at the time of her father's death. A. and her husband had made wills together 10 years previously, in which they bequeath all they have to the survivng spouse, and in the event the spouse predeceases them, leave everything the the daughter. A.'s husband was always clearly the dominant of the two, making all the major financial decisions, and recently had expressed to various relatives the concern that A. at times becomes confused and forgetful.
A.'s husband's deathbed wish was to be buried in the church in the family's old hometown. A. notifies various relatives of this development. Almost immediately, Fourth Cousin Iago, a divorced, childless man who had a friendly relationship with the couple and rents their old house from them, hops on a plane, escorts A. on the plane and attends the funeral service. He also offers A. a place in his house (actually her house) to stay a while, and then escorts her back on the plane home "just to settle her affairs and collect her belongings before she moves back, permanently". He ends up sticking to A. like a barnacle, moving in with her into her house and claiming all the while she needs care and nobody else bothers ith her anyway. Her daughter, unable to fly because she is now heavily pregnant, senses he mother is becoming more and more attached to Iago and is troubled, but can do very little about it long-distance.
A few months later, A. dies. Iago immediately produces a will, dated 1 month after A.'s husband's death, in which she bequeaths all she owns to...Iago, of course. The atorney-draftsman is a personal friend of Iago's, and the witnesses are the attorney's secretary and his law partner. There is also a clause in the will that specifically disinherits the daughter, "for reasons best known to her and wich I shall not go into as not to publically embarrass her". Iago and his lawyer claim A. stated to them the reason for this was because the daugher didn't go rushing out to help her mother like Iago did, and A. had been helpless until Iago came and took over, arranged the funeral and held A.'s hand on the plane.
The daughter subesquently finds out that:
1. Around the time the will was drawn up (before and after), Iago and A. went into various banks, where they proceeded to put all of A.'s money into joint bank accounts with rights of survivorship;
2. Upon enquiry at the funeral home, it seems A. had arranged and paid for the funeral and flying the body "back home" all by herself, and the funeral home director had never dealt with, nor even met, Cousin Iago. So the reason supposedly given by Iago and his lawyer-friend for A. changing her will (at a particularly vulnerable time in her life, it must be said), is demostrably false.
So--
Is the will Iago procured (or is assumed to have procured) a product of undue influence, fraud, both or neither? Given the facts, would you say the daughter has a chance of not being totally disinherited (i.e, having both the will reversed and the money in the JTWROS' returned)?
.