New York Probate and Estate Administration Lawyer Blog
The distribution of a deceased individual’s assets can be a complex and emotional process. Disputes can arise over the interpretation of a will or trust, as well as allegations of undue influence or fraud. The case of Matter of Estate of Richichi is a prime example of such a dispute, where family members of the deceased individual contested the distribution of her assets on the basis of lack of testamentary capacity.
Lack of testamentary capacity refers to a person’s inability to make or alter a will due to mental incapacity. In New York, a person must possess testamentary capacity in order to create or modify a will. To have testamentary capacity in New York, a person must understand the nature and extent of their property, understand the persons who are the natural objects of their bounty, and have a reasonable understanding of the effects of their will. This requires that the person have the ability to comprehend and appreciate the consequences of their decisions and understand the interrelationships among those affected by the will.
A lack of testamentary capacity can be due to a variety of reasons, including but not limited to, mental illness, dementia, and intoxication. If it can be shown that the testator lacked testamentary capacity at the time the will was created, the will may be deemed invalid.
Factual Background
The decedent, Marlene Richichi, passed away in 2004 at the age of 72. She was survived by her three children, Robert Richichi, Jr., John Richichi, and Donna Terhaar. Prior to her passing, Marlene had executed a will in 2001, which named her three children as equal beneficiaries of her estate. The will also named Robert as the executor of the estate.
After Marlene’s passing, Robert submitted the will to probate and was appointed as the executor of the estate. However, John and Donna contested the will, alleging that Robert had unduly influenced Marlene into executing the will and that she lacked the mental capacity to do so. They further alleged that Marlene had intended to leave her estate to all three of her children, rather than just the two sons.
The Surrogate’s Court conducted a trial on the contested will and ultimately found that Marlene had testamentary capacity at the time she executed the will and that there was no evidence of undue influence. As such, the court admitted the will to probate and upheld Robert’s appointment as executor.
Decision
The Appellate Division affirmed the Surrogate’s Court’s decision, finding that there was sufficient evidence to support the finding of testamentary capacity and no evidence of undue influence. The court noted that the mere fact that Marlene had originally intended to leave her estate to all three of her children did not invalidate the will, as she had the right to change her mind and make a new will at any time.
Discussion
The case of Matter of Estate of Richichi illustrates the importance of having a valid and up-to-date will in place. In this case, the will was challenged by two of the decedent’s children, who alleged that their brother had unduly influenced their mother into executing the will and that she lacked the mental capacity to do so. These types of allegations are not uncommon in will contests, and it is important for individuals to take steps to prevent such disputes from arising.
One way to do this is by working with an experienced New York estate lawyer to create a valid will or trust. An attorney can ensure that the document is executed properly and that the individual has the necessary capacity to do so. Additionally, an attorney can help prevent allegations of undue influence by ensuring that the individual is making their own decisions and not being pressured by others.
Another important aspect of this case is the role of the executor. Robert was named as the executor of the estate, and his siblings challenged his appointment, alleging that he had unduly influenced their mother into naming him as the executor. However, the court found no evidence of undue influence and upheld Robert’s appointment. This highlights the importance of selecting a trustworthy and responsible executor who will act in accordance with the wishes of the decedent and in the best interests of the estate.
Conclusion
Matter of Estate of Richichi serves as a reminder of the importance of having a valid and up-to-date will in place to ensure that assets are distributed according to an individual’s wishes. It also underscores the importance of selecting a trustworthy and responsible executor to administer the estate. By working with an New York estate lawyer, individuals can take steps to prevent disputes and ensure that their wishes are carried out after they pass away.