Odom v. Hughes Examines Variety of Will Contest Topics

The Georgia Supreme Court recently issued an opinion in Odom v. Hughes, which examined a widerange of will contest topics, including standing to caveat a will, undueinfluence, testamentary capacity, monomania, and fraud.

The court in this case found sufficient evidence to supportthe jury verdict that the challenged will was the product of undueinfluence.  The facts sufficient tosupport the undue influence claim include the undue influencer was the only one in communication with the drafting attorney, the undue influencerattempted to conceal the drafting attorney from the testator, another attorneywith direct contact with the testator had drafted a will less beneficial to theundue influencer, and evidence existed “that the testator had diminished mentalfaculties.”

The jury also found a lack of testamentary capacity, possiblydue to a viewing of a videotape of the meeting between the testator and thedrafting attorney.  Evidence showedthe nurses believed the testator was regularly confused during the weekssurrounding the will signing, the testator was not taking her memory medicationduring these weeks, and the testator had misidentified her own children on aquestionnaire given to her on the day she signed the will.

Monomania, or a single pathological preoccupation, was alsoan issue in this case.  The testator hada delusion that her relatives had “stolen” her house away from her, but therewas no evidence to prove this had actually happened.

See Luke Lantta, Georgia Supreme Court Addresses NumerousFiduciary Litigation Topics in Will Contest Opinion, Bryan Cave Fiduciary Litigation,July 23, 2013.