- Page 1 and 2:
UNDUE INFLUENCE: DEFINITIONS AND AP
- Page 3 and 4:
Claims of undue influence can be di
- Page 5 and 6:
probate courts. They encounter it a
- Page 7 and 8:
4. Focus groups with San Francisco
- Page 9 and 10:
More recent law is contained in Cal
- Page 11 and 12:
searching bibliographic databases a
- Page 13 and 14:
submissiveness to point that victim
- Page 15 and 16:
Elements of Undue Influence Describ
- Page 17 and 18:
Category I Category II Category III
- Page 19 and 20:
Category I Category II Category III
- Page 21 and 22:
Focus Groups To gain greater insigh
- Page 23 and 24:
for love, emotional attachment, or
- Page 25 and 26:
who would deliver the money.’’
- Page 27 and 28:
esidence (as opposed to, for exampl
- Page 29 and 30:
percent), followed by a change in a
- Page 31 and 32:
escinding the sale of the house. Ri
- Page 33 and 34:
Capacity Declaration Form The menta
- Page 35 and 36:
Case Examples Case Five A 75-year-o
- Page 37 and 38:
to undue influence and to more reli
- Page 39 and 40:
Project staff have been invited to
- Page 41 and 42:
APPENDIX A REPORTS OF CASES DECIDED
- Page 43 and 44:
The facts upon which the allegation
- Page 45 and 46:
APPENDIX B A STATUTORY DEFINITION O
- Page 47 and 48:
whether undue influence has taken p
- Page 49 and 50:
etween the testator and the influen
- Page 51 and 52:
guardian/ward, physician or nurse/p
- Page 53 and 54:
undue influence reduced from the ca
- Page 55 and 56:
said at times that she was afraid o
- Page 57 and 58:
According to Dr. Spar, the common r
- Page 59 and 60:
disposition to exert undue influenc
- Page 61 and 62:
her overall mental and physical wea
- Page 63 and 64:
Familial relationships are frequent
- Page 65 and 66:
This presumption of undue influence
- Page 67 and 68:
element (4) requires a disposition
- Page 69 and 70:
intentions of testator). However, w
- Page 71 and 72:
APPENDIX C Literature Review on Und
- Page 73 and 74:
7. How professionals exploit relati
- Page 75 and 76:
that can be brought to bear in doin
- Page 77 and 78:
professionals who became controvers
- Page 79 and 80:
• Hostage takers threaten to kill
- Page 81 and 82:
Walker identified four general char
- Page 83 and 84:
of anxiety, avoidance behavior and
- Page 85 and 86: and Vicary later retracted some of
- Page 87 and 88: protecting themselves against manip
- Page 89 and 90: not exhibit Stockholm syndrome, law
- Page 91 and 92: financial gain. Others have focused
- Page 93 and 94: esult or outcome of the undue influ
- Page 95 and 96: Association, 2008). Naimark (2001)
- Page 97 and 98: 2. Power Differentials Undue influe
- Page 99 and 100: goes back even further. Abraham Nie
- Page 101 and 102: the signing of contracts, the contr
- Page 103 and 104: to the accused to show that there w
- Page 105 and 106: The authors note that courts tend t
- Page 107 and 108: ing a claim that the church had use
- Page 109 and 110: 8. An elder’s will, living will,
- Page 111 and 112: covered under the prohibited transf
- Page 113 and 114: ecovery of damages, attorneys’ fe
- Page 115 and 116: As noted earlier in this literature
- Page 117 and 118: witnesses with respect to the impor
- Page 119 and 120: Donohue, W. A. (1985). The politics
- Page 121 and 122: Naimark, D. (2001). Financial explo
- Page 123 and 124: Rusch, J. J. (1999). The social eng
- Page 125 and 126: APPENDIX D Capacity Declaration For
- Page 127 and 128: CONSERVATORSHIP OF THE PERSON ESTAT
- Page 129 and 130: APPENDIX E Court File Review - Deta
- Page 131 and 132: Table 8. Age of proposed conservate
- Page 133 and 134: Table 12. Proposed conservatee’s
- Page 135: Table 16. Other traits of alleged a
- Page 139 and 140: Table 24. Other elements/characteri
- Page 141 and 142: Borchard grant file review 1. Case
- Page 143 and 144: Borchard grant file review 12. Tact
- Page 145 and 146: Borchard grant file review 20. Does