E & T Professor Kordesh Study Questions Week 4 Mental Capacity

1. Define “insane delusion”? What is the test for contesting a will on this basis?

- An insane delusion occurs where a person develops a false idea that cannot be based
on any truth and where the person who developed the false idea cannot be
convinced otherwise. The test for contesting a will on this basis is whether 1) there
was an insane delusion and 2) whether that delusion influenced the testator’s
decisions in their will.

a. What was the basis for determining that Louisa Strittmater suffered from an
insane delusion?

- She had a vehement hatred toward men.

b. What did Louisa Strittmater believe existed that no rational person would
believe existed?

- The court said Strittmater was delusional because of her hatred toward men. She
looked forward to the day that men would no longer be required for reproduction
and when men would be put to death at birth.

c. Would the standard for insane delusion be upheld today? Why or why not?

- Probably not. She did not suffer from any real delusion that a false fact existed. She
just hated men. I do not think this would be upheld today because society’s
standards have changed a lot. Feminism, even in this extreme form, is more
acceptable.

2. What is the distinction between testamentary capacity and insane delusion

according to the Breedon court? How do testamentary capacity and insane delusion
overlap?

- A person lacks testamentary capacity when they suffer from mental illness, physical
infirmity, senile dementia, or general insanity. A person suffers from an insane
delusion where they believe a false idea and cannot be convinced otherwise by any
evidence. A person cannot have testamentary capacity if they suffer from an insane
delusion, but only if the insane delusion is the root cause of the contested change in
the will.

a. What was the evidence that Spicer Breedon had testamentary capacity?

- Breedon could index his property, knew the devisee’s address, had legible
handwriting, and laid out his will in a logical and reasonably forth set manner.
 b. What was the evidence that Spicer Breedon did not suffer from an insane
delusion?

- His alleged delusion did not impact the content of the will and Breedon was not
close with his family whatsoever.

3. When is influence undue? What are the two circumstances that give rise to a contest
for undue influence?

- There are four elements of undue influence: “(1) an unnatural disposition has been
made (2) by a person susceptible to undue influence to the advantage of someone
(3) with an opportunity to exercise undue influence and (4) who in fact has used
that opportunity to procure the contested disposition through improper means.”
- One circumstance that gives rise to a contest of undue influence is where a person is
given great deference by someone (to an unreasonable level). Another circumstance
is where a person is in a position of authority to someone, i.e., owes the testator a
fiduciary duty.

4. Explain the circumstances of Alice Sharis that support the determination 1) that she
was susceptible to undue influence, 2) that there was opportunity to exert influence,
3) that there was a result appearing to be the effect of undue influence, and 4) that
Richard Spinelli was of a disposition to exert undue influence.

- She was susceptible to undue influence because of her old age, lack of education,
lack of knowledge about wills, and Spinelli’s complete control over her finances.
- Spinelli had ample opportunity to exert influence. He procured the will.
- The result was that Spinelli was to inherit a great deal of Alice’s property and had
control over her finances.
- Spinelli was of a disposition to exert undue influence over Alice because of his
position as a fiduciary to Alice.

5. What was the nature of the confidential relationship between Alice Sharis and
Richard Spinelli?

- Spinelli was Sharis’ power of attorney.

6. Describe in detail the top three factors you believe supported the conclusion that
there were suspicious circumstances present in Sharis.

- Spinelli’s role in procuring the will.

- Spinelli’s position of power over Alice.
- Alice’s susceptibility to undue influence.

7. Did Richard Spinelli violate Model Rule of Professional Responsibility 1.8(c)? Why
or why not?
- No, because he was not an attorney and therefore not subject to the MPPR. Even if
he had been an attorney, because he Alice’s grandson, he would have been exempt
from this rule.

8. What reasons did Sophie Block identify for leaving her grandchildren by her eldest
son Julian out of her will?

- She said they were essentially estranged and unfriendly to her and Frank.

9. What was the substance of the claim that Sophie Block had been the object of undue
influence?

- That Frank had a key to Sophie’s house and that Sophie did not draft the will or tell
anyone about its terms, and that the statements about Bernice and the
grandchildren were false.

10. What is the responsibility of an attorney who prepares a will regarding capacity?
Can the drafting attorney be named a beneficiary, executor or fiduciary under the
will?

- An attorney’s responsibility regarding capacity when preparing a will is that they

should pay attention to the client’s ability to make decisions.
- Yes, but only if they are relatives of the testator. The attorney does not have to be a
family member to be named executor.

11. What steps should an attorney take to minimize the possibility of a will contest
based on testamentary capacity, insane delusion, or undue influence?

- Should make sure their client is of sound mind by interviewing client. They should
avoid drafting wills for people they have close relationships unless the will is not
likely to be contested for giving the drafting attorney-beneficiary-family member a
larger share of the estate.

12. Hypothetical: T belonged to an organized religion whose members strongly believe

in reincarnation. T hired a psychic to determine the identity of the person in whom
T would be reincarnated. T then executed a will leaving this person his entire
estate. Can T’s children successfully contest this will?

- ISSUE: Did the testator lack testamentary capacity by insane delusion?

- RULE: A person lacks testamentary capacity when she suffers from insane delusion,
that is, she believes something that cannot be true, and that false belief causes the
testator to create a particular distribution scheme.
- APPLICATION: Even if one believes in reincarnation—and this belief is probably not
one that we can generally agree is not true—it is unlikely that any rational person
would believe that it is possible to identify whose body a reincarnated soul will
occupy. Nor would a rational person believe that a psychic could do it.
- CONCLUSION: The testator suffered from insane delusion and therefore did not
have testamentary capacity. The estate will be distributed as though the will did not
exist.
- ISSUE: Was the testator unduly influenced by the religious organization.
- RULE: There are four elements of undue influence: “(1) an unnatural disposition has
been made (2) by a person susceptible to undue influence to the advantage of
someone (3) with an opportunity to exercise undue influence and (4) who in fact
has used that opportunity to procure the contested disposition through improper
means.”
- It is unnatural to cut out one’s children in favor of a religious organization. Less
clear is whether the testator was susceptible to influence, although arguably the
nature and conditions of the gift suggest susceptibility. While it is unclear whether
the church had the opportunity to influence the testator, it would be easy to
determine whether there are facts for this proof. Finally, there are no facts to
suggest that the church used the its opportunity to influence the testator. Without
more facts, there could not be a conclusion that there was undue influence.
- CONCLUSION: There was not undue influence exercised over the testator.