To prove undue influence, one of the four elements you must establish is the equity of the result. Evidence of the equity of the result may include, but is not limited to, economic consequences to the victim, any divergence from the victim’s prior intent or course of conduct or dealing, the relationship of the value conveyed to the value of any services or consideration received, or the appropriateness of the change in light of the length and nature of the relationship.
Undue influence means excessive persuasion that causes another person to act or refrain from acting by overcoming that person’s free will and results in inequity. There are four factors under California Welfare and Institutions Code section 15610.70 required to prove undue influence. They are:
- The vulnerability of the victim
- The influencer’s apparent authority over the victim
- The influencer’s action and tactics, and
- The equity of the result.
How to look at the equity of the result?
Many people focus first on the equity of the result and tie that equity to the effect it has on themselves. For example, where a child is disinherited, they may say it is unfair that they did not receive their share of the trust. And that may be a true statement. But equity is never enough, by itself, to prove undue influence. Also, equity is measured from the point of view of the victim. A parent has the right to disinherit a child; provided that, the parent is acting of their own free will. The child may find that harsh or unfair, but fairness alone will not be useful in undoing the result.
An inequitable result can be useful, however, when used in combination with the other three elements of undue influence. For example, you may have an elder who suffers from mild to moderate dementia (they are susceptible to undue influence), and a caretaker moves in and gets close to the elder and begins to isolate them. The caretaker blocks family members from visiting or calling the elder. When the elder is in the hospital due to a broken hip from a fall, the caretaker brings in a lawyer who prepares a trust amendment leaving the entire estate to the caretaker, which is a big change from the prior trust provision that left everything to the children equally.
Looking at undue influence results closer
Viewed from the point of view of the elder, making a big change to his prior estate plan by leaving everything to the caretaker instead of his children certainly looks to be an inequitable result. That is especially true when measured from the perspective of an elder who has been isolated by a caretaker and changed their trust while in the hospital.
But notice, the inequitable result, by itself, was not the deciding factor. Inequality must always be viewed in context of the other undue influence elements and not in isolation. That is the mistake many people make when looking at a trust contest case. Inequity certainly is an important ingredient in an undue influence case, but like most ingredients, it does not make the whole dish by itself. You need the other elements of undue influence to finish the recipe.
So, how do you prove a change to a trust or will was caused by undue influence and not the free will of the elder? That’s where you have to hire an experienced law firm that knows how to handle a trust or will contest based on undue influence.
Don’t be an abused beneficiary
Our attorneys have taken action against hundreds of trustees for abusing their beneficiaries. We’ve also recovered more than $300 million and helped hundreds and hundreds of clients regain their dignity as a trust or will beneficiary through litigation – if you believe you’ve been the victim of inheritance abuse, tell us your story to see if your case qualifies for a free consultation. We’re here to stand, fight and win for you.
Call (877) 408-3813 or reach out online to consult a trust contest lawyer.
