Nothing looks more suspicious,
though quite common, than the dying man who makes a deathbed will. It is the stuff of Hollywood. Picture the elderly man summoning his lawyer to
his deathbed. The lawyer drafts the will
as the invalid dictates the contents.
The invalid declares that his entire estate shall pass to his wicked mistress—a
young looker and manipulative gold digger.
The scarlet woman places the pen in the man’s hand and firmly demands, “sign
it.” The will is signed. The priest reads the testator’s last rites as
his soul leaves his body. His faithful
children are now destitute.
Of course, a lawsuit will
follow. The faithful children accuse the
mistress of unduly influencing their father and demanding, in court, that the
judge refuse the will. After all, why would
a loving father not provide for his children at death? Had the mistress not used her seductive powers
and lies to poison the mind of their father, the children would enjoy a
profitable future. Unfortunately for the children, a woman’s seduction
alone is not enough to invalidate a will.
In the case of Parrisella v. Fotopulos, 111 Ariz. 4,
6, 522 P.2d 1081, 1083 (Ariz. 1974), the Arizona Supreme Court defines “undue
influence” as follows:
Conduct by which a person unduly
influences a testator in executing a will, when that person through his power
over the mind of the testator makes the latter’s desires conform to his own,
thereby overmastering the volition of the testator.
The court reasoned that
a woman’s seductive power does meet this standard:
It is settled law of this state
that [an] illicit relationship is not sufficient per se to warrant a conclusion
of undue influence. And no presumption
of undue influence arises merely from the fact that a man . . . makes a will in favor of his mistress.”
Id.
(citations omitted).
So, unlike in the
movies, in real life, the wicked mistress just might win.
No comments:
Post a Comment