Undue Influence: Definitions and Applications - California Courts ...

intentions of testator). However, where there is a presumption of undue influence, 81 it is up to
the proponent of the will to prove the absence of undue influence.
IV. Conclusion
Once undue influence has been found, some states hold that the entire will is invalid. 82
The general rule, however, is that only the provisions that have been tainted by undue influence
need to be thrown out. Other provisions of the will may be valid so long as they are
interdependent from the invalid provisions and can be separated without defeating testator’s
intent or distribution scheme.
Likewise, the general rule will not be appropriate where it would cause unfairness to
testator’s heirs. In Re Estate of Robinson, the Supreme Court of Kansas held that it was an error
for the trial court to deny the entire will for probate upon finding that certain provisions were a
result of undue influence by the testator’s wife.
83 Instead, the trial court should have admitted
the will for probate and stricken the provision procured by the wife. 84
As for Arthur and Irene, by applying the four-factors model we achieve the consistent
result striven for by this paper. Under element (1) of the four factors, both Arthur and Irene were
susceptible to undue influence, Arthur because of his physical condition of being on his death
bed, and Irene because of her mental condition which led to her suicide. In both cases, the
beneficiaries had the opportunity to influence the decedents. Both beneficiaries were spouses of
the decedents, giving them ample opportunity to exert influence.
81 There is a presumption of undue influence when [there is] a relationship between the testator and the beneficiary;
the beneficiary actively participated in procuring or executing the testamentary document; and the beneficiary
unduly benefited from the testamentary document.
82 36 Am. Jur. Proof of Facts 2d 109, at 27.
83 Re Estate of Robinson (1982) 644 P2d 420.
84 Id.
68