Friendship, or Undue Influence?

One way to prove that a decedent's Will is invalid involves proving that someone (usually the person who stands to  inherit most of the decedent's property) unduly influenced the decedent to execute the Will.  This can be a tricky business, as the case discussed in this article makes clear.

Stephen T. Altimari is a patrolman in the Rhode Island town of Hopkinton.  In 2002, Mr. Altimari began making regular visits to Mark W. Smith, an elderly local resident -- the visits occurred "two to three times per week for a half-hour to 45 minutes at a time."  Those visits continued to February 2005, when in the course of a three-day period Mr. Smith:

(1) executed a new Will, leaving all of his property to Mr. Altimari,

(2) fell ill (hours after signing the Will), and

(3) died.

Some of Mr. Smith's family members sought to challenge the execution of the Will, apparently arguing undue influence by Mr. Altimari and a lack of capacity to execute a Will by Mr. Smith, but the probate judge ruled against them.  The family members are now proceeding with their case in a rather unusual way, arguing that Mr. Altimari acted improperly because many (if not most) of his visits to Mr. Smith were made while Mr. Altimari was on the job. 

It might be helpful to look at the factors that work in Mr. Altimari's favor in an undue influence analysis:

Factors That Work For Mr. Altimari

-Everyone agrees that he spent a lot of time with Mr. Smith

-By contrast, it doesn't appear that Mr. Smith's family members spent much time with him (one of the individuals who attempted to set aside Mr. Smith's Will, his nephew, stated that "We weren't close, but we got along good")

-Mr. Smith's doctor said that Mr. Smith spoke "frequently and fondly" of Mr. Altimari and his wife

-Perhaps most importantly, there's no evidence Mr. Altimari suggested that Mr. Smith execute a new Will, or that he had anything to do with the execution of the new Will.  I presume that that Will was drafted by an attorney who had meetings with Mr. Smith about what the new Will should say, and why he was making a change.

What about the factors that work against Mr. Altimari?  They are fairly weak, and filled with "buts":

-Mr. Smith had some disorientation while driving.  BUT his doctor said that Mr. Smith was fine, and the witnesses to the signing of the Will found Mr. Smith to be "cognizant and mentally alert"

-Mr. Altimari may have visited Mr. Smith during on-duty hours.  BUT it appears that the local police chief asked him to do so, and the chief also stated that Mr. Altimari's visits were made on his lunch break

-Mr. Altimari didn't tell Mr. Smith's relatives that Mr. Smith had fallen ill or that he died.  BUT Mr. Altimari would have no reason to contact the family if Mr. Smith wasn't close to them

Does the above analysis mean that Mr. Altimari didn't take advantage of Mr. Smith?  Of course not.  But the difficulty is in the proof.  Only two people can speak to whether undue influence was involved -- one of those people (Mr. Smith) is deceased, and the other one (Mr. Altimari) obviously says it wasn't.