Undue Influence Not Found Where No Evidence of Financial Exploitation
In re Estate of Iannacco, Docket No. A-1674-22 (N.J. Super. App. Div. June 24, 2024)
Maria Iannacco (“Decedent”) was married to Aldo Iannacco Sr. (Aldo Sr.). They had two sons, plaintiff Francesco Iannacco (“Francesco”) and defendant Aldo Iannacco Jr. (“Aldo Jr.”). Francesco had two children, and Aldo Jr. had two children, including defendant Bianca Martinelli (“Bianca”).
In 1990, the Decedent and Aldo Sr. prepared reciprocal wills, dividing the marital estate in equal shares between their sons.
Aldo Sr. died in 2011.
The Decedent died on January 18, 2021. At the time of her death, Aldo Jr. was listed as the executor in a new will she executed on February 5, 2020 (“2020 Will”). In the 2020 Will, the Decedent listed her sons and grandchildren as beneficiaries, with each grandchild receiving $25,000, Francesco receiving only $1, and Aldo Jr. receiving the rest of the estate.
Francesco filed a complaint alleging that the 2020 Will was the product of undue influence by the defendants, Aldo Jr. and Bianca.
Aldo Jr. and Bianca were primarily responsible for the care and supervision of the Decedent’s health and wellness.
Aldo Jr. testified that, beginning in 2019, the Decedent had complained about Francesco not calling her. He also testified the Decedent told him that Francesco stopped talking to her after he demanded to be her executor and she refused.
The attorney who prepared the 2020 Will testified about his meeting with the Decedent where she told him she wanted to exclude Francesco. The Decedent stated she and Francesco had a falling out and she had been estranged from him for about three years. The Decedent’s doctor testified she had told him she was upset about her relationship with Francesco and had problems trying to reach him. Several other family members also testified to this effect, but the trial court found attorney and doctor testimonies to be the most credible because they were impartial third parties. The trial court found that the 2020 Will was not the product of undue influence.
The Appellate Division affirmed the trial court. It determined that the trial court’s conclusions were supported by credible evidence and a correct interpretation of the law. Accordingly, the Appellate Division had no basis to reverse the trial court and rejected Francesco’s arguments that the trial court failed to recognize (1) a confidential relationship between the Decedent and Aldo Jr. and Bianca and (2) suspicious circumstances leading to the creation and execution of the 2020 Will.
The Appellate Division found that the following facts did not rise to the level of suspicious circumstances: the existence of a joint account between the defendants and the Decedent; Aldo Jr. driving the Decedent to an appointment with the drafting attorney; and that the Decedent executed a new will months after Bianca had moved into a second-floor apartment above the Decedent’s home. The court reasoned that those three things, absent any suggestion of financial impropriety, did not outweigh the credible evidence showing that the Decedent had expressed concerns about her relationship with Francesco and wanted to change her will.