Probate litigation can be a complex process, especially when disputes arise over the validity of a will. In Minnesota, undue influence and duress are two common grounds for challenging a will. While these terms may seem similar, they have distinct meanings and implications in the context of probate law.
Attorneys can assist when determining if litigation is necessary due to undue influence or duress.
Undue influence
Undue influence occurs when someone exerts excessive pressure to overpower the testator’s (the person making the will) free will. This can involve manipulation, persuasion, or coercion by a trusted individual who stands to benefit from the will. The critical element in undue influence is that the testator’s decision-making process is unduly swayed by another person rather than being a true reflection of their wishes.
Duress
Duress includes threats or actual harm that force the testator to act against their will. Someone might subject the testator to physical violence, blackmail, or other forms of severe pressure to make or change their will, causing duress. Unlike undue influence, which can be more subtle and psychological, duress is often more overt and involves a direct threat or force.
Understanding the differences
Undue influence and duress can invalidate a will, but they differ in their methods of coercion. Undue influence relies on psychological manipulation, whereas duress involves direct threats or harm. Understanding these differences is crucial for anyone involved in probate litigation in Minnesota. It helps determine the validity of a will and ensures that the testator’s true intentions are honored.