WILL CONTEST BASED ON UNDUE INFLUENCE AND LACK OF TESTAMENTARY CAPACITY FAILS

• Friday, March 29, 2019
• Category: Wills, Trusts and Estate Litigation

A party contesting a will failed to meet her burden of proof, because she did not present any testimony or documentary evidence in support of her claims of undue influence or lack of testamentary capacity.

Decedent Michael Marinucci died on June 24, 2017. Five days prior to his death, decedent executed a will. This will was signed by decedent and two witnesses, and was supported by an affidavit of the witnesses. The court admitted this will to probate.

Susan Marinucci was decedent’s sister and sole intestate heir. In September 2017, she appealed the decree in this probate case. According to Ms. Marinucci, decedent lacked testamentary capacity and the will of June 2017 was procured by undue influence. The court scheduled a hearing, which was set over for a later date to allow for discovery. The attorney for Susan Marinucci withdrew prior to the hearing.

At the hearing, Susan Marinucci appeared pro se. Counsel for the proponent of the will introduced the self-proving will that was admitted to probate to establish that decedent’s will was properly executed. Ms. Marinucci admitted at the hearing that she had no witnesses to establish her claim that decedent lacked testamentary capacity or that his will had been subject to undue influence. She did, however, attempt to introduce medical records into evidence. Opposing counsel objected, because he had not previously received copies of these documents and they were not properly authenticated under the evidentiary rules. The court sustained the objection. Ms. Marinucci did not provide any other documentary evidence or witnesses. The court granted a motion for nonsuit against Susan Marinucci, and she appealed.

The court concluded that Ms. Marinucci failed to meet her burden in this case. Once the proper will execution formalities were established, a presumption of a lack of undue influence arose. The court found that the proponent of the will met his burden here with the self-proving will. The burden of proof then shifted to the party contesting the will to present evidence of undue influence or lack of testamentary capacity. Susan Marinucci attempted to obtain a continuance, but opposing counsel objected, and the court denied the request for a continuance. Ms. Marinucci’s only stated reason for seeking the continuance was to obtain counsel after her previous attorney withdrew. She had nearly two months to find a new attorney, which the court held was more than reasonable time. Because Susan Marinucci failed to provide any evidence in support of her will contest, the court concluded that the matter was properly dismissed.

Reference: Digest of Recent Opinions, Pennsylvania Law Weekly, 41 PLW 959, Tuesday, October 9, 2018, In Re Marinucci, PICS Case No. 18-1158 (C.P. Philadelphia Aug. 28, 2018) Herron, J.

Kindly visit our Estate Litigation or Trusts & Estate Planning websites or contact one of our Probate Attorneys, Philadelphia or Wills, Trusts and Estate Litigation Attorneys, Philadelphia at 215-977-8200 for more information on this topic.