T&E Litigation Update: Howes v. Riordan
In Howes v. Riordan, Case No. 11-P-596, 2012 Mass. App. Unpub. LEXIS 220 (Feb. 28, 2012), a decision issued pursuant to Rule 1:28, the Appeals Court affirmed the allowance of a motion to strike an affidavit of objections.
The decedent executed a last will on February 26, 2008, leaving a tea cart to her daughter Judith and the residue of her estate to her sons John and James. The decedent died on June 12, 2010, following which James filed the will for probate and Judith filed an affidavit of objections. In response to the affidavit of objections, John and James filed a motion to strike or alternatively for summary judgment. In opposition, Judith's counsel filed an affidavit asserting that he could not adequately defend the summary judgment motion without additional discovery.
The probate court granted the motion to strike, and the Appeals Court affirmed, rejecting Judith's argument that it was procedurally improper for John and James to combine their motion to strike with a motion for summary judgment. The Appeals Court also rejected Judith's substantive arguments.
Regarding her claim of lack of testamentary capacity, the Court held that Judith failed to allege sufficient facts supporting her claim. Although the decedent was physically in decline, "Judith simply fails to set forth facts that connect her [the decedent's] physical decline to the elements of testamentary capacity. ... The affidavit is silent as to the [decedent's] communication skills or ability to converse coherently, her level of awareness of her estate, her level of awareness of her children and their relationship with her, her ability to respond appropriately to information, or other indicia of testamentary capacity."
Judith's undue influence claim was rejected for the same reason, i.e., she failed to allege sufficient facts raising a triable claim that the decedent's declining physical health caused her to be susceptible to undue influence.
Recommended
Day Pitney Litigation Partner Mark Romance and Fiduciary and Probate Litigation Partner Ann Hetherwick "Hether" Cahill were featured in the CityBiz article, "Day Pitney Names Mark Romance and Ann Hetherwick Cahill Chairs of Fiduciary and Probate Litigation Practice Group."
Day Pitney Press Release
Three Day Pitney Private Client Department Partners were selected for inclusion on Boston magazine's Top Lawyers of 2024 list*. The selected attorneys are: Christine N. Fletcher, Partner – Trusts and Estates; Jordana G. Schreiber, Partner – Trusts and Estates; and Tiffany M. Bentley, Partner – Family Law.
Day Pitney Litigation Department Chair Manuel Garcia-Linares was featured in the Daily Business Review article, "Florida Supreme Court Clarifies Qualifications for Court – Appointed Arbitrators." Garcia
Day Pitney Press Release
Day Pitney Miami Partners Melissa A. Rodriguez and Mark A. Romance authored the article "Tradition vs. Technology: Original Paper Wills Are Still Required," for the Daily Business Review.
Day Pitney Litigation Partner Mark Romance co-authored the article, "Tips for Navigating First-Time Trial Preparation," for the ABA Litigation Section Newsletter.
Boston partner Hether Cahill will be a faculty member during the upcoming Massachusetts Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) “Taking Depositions Interactive Workshop 2024,” including presenting specifically on the topic “Using Demonstratives,” on October 18.
Day Pitney Press Release
Day Pitney's Fiduciary and Probate Litigation team in Boston authored several chapters in the 6th edition of Fiduciary Litigation in the Probate Court, published by Massachusetts Continuing Legal Education (MCLE).