What Are the Factors in a Florida “Undue Influence” Claim?

When family members end up in litigation over a loved one’s estate, there is almost always an accusation of “undue influence.” This is a legal concept used to describe a situation where the recipient of property abused a confidential relationship with the grantor in order to obtain title. According to the Florida Supreme Court, there are a number of factors that can support a judicial finding of undue influence, including:

• the beneficiary was present when the deed was executed;
• the beneficiary was present when the grantor expressed a desire to make a deed;
• the beneficiary recommended and/or instructed an attorney to draft the deed for the grantor;
• the beneficiary knew of the deed’s contents prior to its execution by the grantor;
• the beneficiary procured the witnesses for the deed; and
• the beneficiary kept the deed after its execution.

Not all of these factors need to be present. Indeed, Florida law creates a presumption of undue influence whenever the beneficiary was in a confidential relationship with the grantor. The factors are simply a way to help establish this presumption.

Fifth District Revives Brother-vs.-Brother Lawsuit Over Mother’s Property

A recent decision from the Florida Fifth District Court of Appeals, Leitner v. Leitner, provides a useful example. This case involves litigation between two brothers, named George and Philip, over their late mother’s estate. The mother died in 2021 at the age of 100. Her will, signed in 2016, named George as personal representative of her estate. The will further gave her house and the surrounding property to either a Family Limited Partnership or directly to George.

But shortly after executing this will, the mother signed a deed giving the property in question directly to Philip. After the mother’s death, litigation ensued between George and Philip. George accused Philip of obtaining the deed through undue influence over their mother. The trial court dismissed the case at the summary judgment stage, however, finding there was insufficient evidence to create a presumption of undue influence.

On appeal, the Fifth District reversed. The appellate court cited Philip’s own deposition testimony, in which he acknowledged he was present when his mother signed the deed, he recommended the attorney who prepared the deed, and he participated in discussions with both his mother and the attorney about the deed. Given all this, the Fifth District said there was more than sufficient evidence to raise a presumption of undue influence.

To be clear, the Court of Appeals did not rule on the merits of the case. The only issue was whether there were sufficient facts alleged to survive Philip’s motion for summary judgment. There was, which means the case can proceed to trial.

Contact a Pompano Beach Undue Influence Lawyer Today

Allegations of undue influence can often tear a family apart. That is why it is important to work with a Pompano Beach undue influence attorney who understands how to handle these sensitive matters. Contact the offices of Mark R. Manceri, P.A., today to schedule a consultation.

Source:

scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1763749499469901020