Comprehensive Legal Solutions That Work

Estate And Trust Litigation

Last updated on September 16, 2024

Litigation in trust and estate cases can bring together the perfect storm of conflicts: family, money and the loss of a loved one. Our estate planning lawyers at Messick Law, PLLC, understand trust and estate disputes, both in terms of the legal issues and the emotional toll they can take on individuals. They also understand the importance of getting all of the details right and staying abreast of relevant Minnesota laws.

As with all of our cases, our firm’s attorneys take a systematic approach to your legal issue, starting with an investigation into the relevant facts and then developing a winning plan. If your legal challenge does not get resolved with a settlement agreement and needs to be litigated, our trial lawyers will be ready.

Litigating An Estate

The following are examples of cases in which we have assisted our clients with litigation for estate matters:

Petitioning for probate of a last will and testament, and defending against challengers
Litigating the validity of a last will and testament or trust
Asserting and defending against claims of a surviving spouse
Asserting and defending against creditors’ claims
Challenging and defending the appointment or removal of trustees and personal representatives
Correcting omissions or errors in prior probates
Challenging and defending real estate transfers of a decedent
Directing and defending the actions of a fiduciary
Challenging and defending nonprobate transfers such as change in beneficiary status or joint ownership of assets

As trust and estate lawyers in Minnesota, we have a strong grasp of substantive law and are experienced at defending estate plans and trusts, as well as challenging them.

Probate Disputes: Challenging The Validity Of A Will

The most common dispute in probate is the validity of a decedent’s last will and testament. The person who made the will is generally referred to as the testator or decedent. The two most common challenges to the validity of a will are that the decedent lacked capacity when the decedent signed the will and/or that the decedent was unduly influenced to make the will.

The Initial Burden Of Proof

The person petitioning for probate of a will bears the initial burden to prove that a decedent’s will is valid. For a will to be valid in Minnesota, it must be in writing, signed by the person who is making the will and signed by at least two witnesses. There are some exceptions to this, such as the harmless error statute, so it is important to talk to a licensed attorney if you have questions about the validity of the will.

A Challenger’s Burden Of Proof

Once the petitioner meets the burden of proof that the will is presumptively valid, then an interested person has an opportunity to contest the validity of the will. Challengers to the validity of a will bear a higher burden of proof than the initial petitioner.

To successfully challenge a will due to a lack of capacity, the challenger must prove by clear and convincing evidence that the decedent did not know the nature, situation and extent of the decedent’s own property or the claims of others on that property. They also have to prove that the decedent was unable to hold those concepts in mind long enough to form a rational judgment. This is a lower standard than the capacity required for a person to enter into a contract.

Factors For Determining Capacity

The courts consider the following factors in determining if a person had the capacity to make a will:

The reasonableness of the property disposition
The testator’s conduct within a reasonable time before and after executing the will
A prior adjudication of the testator’s mental capacity
Expert testimony about the testator’s physical and mental condition

To successfully challenge a will based on a claim of undue influence, the challenger must prove by clear and convincing evidence that the influence exerted over the decedent was to the degree that the will reflects the other person’s intent instead of the testator’s intent. The evidence must show that the influence exerted was so dominant and controlling of the decedent’s mind that, in making the will, he or she ceased to act of his or her own free will and became a mere puppet of the wielder of that influence.

Determining Undue Influence

Factors that the courts consider when determining if undue influence occurred are:

The opportunity someone had to exercise influence
The existence of a confidential (or close) relationship between the testator and the person claimed to have influenced the testator
Active participation by the alleged influencer in preparing the will
An unexpected disinheritance or an unreasonable disposition
The singularity of will provisions (meaning, did all of the property go to the alleged influencer)
Inducement of the testator to make the will (meaning, the influence was the reason the testator made the will)

The facts of each case are unique, but an experienced attorney can help you better understand if you have a legal reason to challenge a will. Our experienced estate litigators can assess the facts of your situation. If you have legal standing to challenge a will, they can help you devise a legal strategy.

Spousal Rights For The Estate Of A Deceased Spouse

Surviving spouses have specific rights to the estate of their deceased spouse, even if the deceased spouse did not provide for the survivor in the will. Unless the spouses entered into a valid prenuptial or postnuptial agreement in Minnesota, surviving spouses may be entitled to a portion of the deceased spouse’s property.

The spousal rights allowed are apportioned according to the number of years that the decedent and spouse were married. This is referred to as the surviving spouse’s elective share. Surviving spouses may also be entitled to a specific property, including a vehicle and a specific amount of money.

Determining spousal rights and the calculation of the amount due to a surviving spouse is a complex process. Our team has experience pursuing and protecting the rights of surviving spouses, as well as experience in defending and challenging nuptial agreements on behalf of the decedent’s children or other devisees.

Claims Of Creditors

The probate process allows for persons to submit claims for debts that were incurred during the decedent’s life or by the decedent’s estate after death. There are strict time limits for the submission of claims. There are also different types of claims, which have differing priorities in the order of how they get paid.

The Actions Of The Personal Representative

In probate, the court appoints one or more persons to serve as the personal representative of the estate. A personal representative (“PR”) is more commonly known as the executor of the estate. The PR is tasked with managing the estate according to the terms of a decedent’s will, or when there is no will, according to the Minnesota probate rules and statutes. A PR acts in a fiduciary capacity, meaning the PR must act in an impartial manner with a view toward the best interests of the beneficiaries and creditors of an estate.

Disputes Relating To The Personal Representative

Often disputes can arise if a PR asserts his or her own individual interests over the interests of others or if the PR is making unwise decisions regarding the administration of the estate. If you suspect that a PR is failing to uphold their fiduciary duties, our estate litigation attorneys can provide you with legal guidance and advice that is based on their experience and an in-depth understanding of Minnesota estate laws.

Trust Disputes: The Validity Of A Trust

The most common dispute in trust cases is the validity of a trust or an amendment to a trust. The person who made the trust is generally referred to as the settlor. The two most common challenges to the validity of the trust are that the settlor lacked capacity when the settlor signed the trust or that the settlor was unduly influenced to make or amend the trust.

Challenging A Trust For The Lack Of Capacity

To successfully challenge a trust due to lack of capacity, the challenger must prove by clear and convincing evidence that the settlor did not know the nature, situation and extent of the settlor’s property and the claims of others on said property and was unable to hold those in mind long enough to form a rational judgment. This is a lower standard than the capacity required for a person to enter into a contract.

The courts consider the following factors in determining whether or not a person had capacity to make a trust:

The reasonableness of the property disposition
The testator’s conduct within a reasonable time before and after executing the trust
A prior adjudication of the settlor’s mental capacity
Expert testimony about the settlor’s physical and mental condition

To successfully challenge a trust based on undue influence, the challenger must prove by clear and convincing evidence that the influence exerted over the settlor was to the degree that the trust or trust amendment reflects the other person’s intent instead of the settlor’s intent. The evidence must show that the influence exerted was so dominant and controlling of the settlor’s mind that, in making the trust or trust amendment, he or she ceased to act of his or her own free will and became a mere puppet of the wielder of that influence.

Factors For Determining If Undue Influence Occurred

Factors that the courts consider when determining if undue influence occurred are:

The opportunity someone had to exercise influence
The existence of a confidential (or close) relationship between the settlor and the person claimed to have influenced the settlor
Active participation by the alleged influencer in preparing the trust or trust amendment
An unexpected disinheritance or an unreasonable disposition
The singularity of trust provisions (meaning, did all of the property go to the alleged influencer)
Inducement of the settlor to make the trust or trust amendment (meaning, the influence was the reason the settlor made the trust or trust amendment)

The facts of each case are unique, and you need an experienced attorney in Minnesota to assist with any challenge or defense of a trust. Our trust administration attorneys can help assess your situation and discern whether or not you have a valid reason to challenge a trust. If you are the administrator of a trust that is being challenged, we can help you defend the validity of the trust.

Responsibilities And Actions Of The Trustee

Trustees serve as stewards of trust assets and are required to follow the explicit terms of the trust and the statutes of Minnesota. Trustees must act in the best interests of the trust beneficiaries and cannot put the trustee’s own individual interests ahead of the beneficiaries’ interests.

Unless instructed otherwise in the trust instrument, when managing trust assets, trustees must invest the trust’s assets in the same way a prudent investor would. This means that a trustee needs to maximize returns for the beneficiaries.

Often, disputes can arise if beneficiaries believe that a trustee is only interested in advancing the trustee’s best interests or if the trustee is poorly managing the trust assets. Our team of Minnesota trust administration attorneys has experience defending trustees as well as challenging trustees who violate their duties.

Changing Ownership And Beneficiary Disputes

In Minnesota, people can transfer property to others upon their death without the use of a will or trust. This can be done with bank accounts or other financial accounts by naming payable on death beneficiaries on said accounts or by adding others as joint owners. Real estate can be transferred by the recording of a transfer on death deed (TODD) or by adding others as owners as joint tenants with rights of survivorship. Challenges to payable on death designations or a TODD are the same as challenges to a will or trust.

Challenges to the addition of owners during a person’s lifetime are different than challenges to payable on death or TODD designations. This is because the addition of an owner to an account requires a higher level of capacity by the person who is adding the additional owner. This higher level of capacity is often referred to as contractual capacity. To prove someone did not have contractual capacity, a challenger must prove that the account owner did not understand the nature and effect of adding another person as an owner to the account.

Consult A Minnesota Estate Litigation Attorney Today

Our experienced team of Minnesota estate litigators provides legal guidance and advice to clients who are considering a challenge to an estate’s administration. To schedule an initial consultation appointment, contact us today by sending an inquiry through our website or call our office at 651-505-2655.