Tortious Interference With Inheritance Rights Article

Associate Professor of Law Diane J. Klein of the Albany Law School of Union University has recently published an article entitled A Disappointed Yankee in Connecticut (or Nearby) Probate Court: Tortious Interference With Expectation of Inheritance — A Survey With Analysis of State Approaches in the First, Second, and Third Circuits, 66 U. Pitt. L. Rev. 235 (2004).

Here is the conclusion of Prof. Klein’s article:

The approaches taken to tortious interference with expectation of inheritance in the states and jurisdictions of the First, Second, and Third Circuits-recognition under the Restatement (Second) of Torts Section 774B, with a living donor, with a dead donor, requiring “continuous” interference, restricting the tort to prevention of execution of a will favoring the plaintiff, non-recognition, silence-together with the equally wide array of tort choice of law approaches taken in the same states and jurisdictions-the Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws Sections 6 and 145, “choice-influencing considerations,” “governmental interest analysis,” the Neumeier rules, and hybrid approaches-combine to present a dizzying array of opportunities and challenges to parties and practitioners alike. As the expansion of the tort continually erodes the probate court’s exclusive jurisdiction over the disposition of estate assets and the remedies available to parties interested in those assets, an awareness of state-by-state variation in substantive tort law, as well as tort choice of law, becomes absolutely essential, both for adequately understanding what law will apply to provide a remedy for a particular injury, and for adequately representing the interests of clients who have suffered (or are alleged to have inflicted) those very injuries