When an individual passes away, their will is intended to be an accurate reflection of their final wishes. However, it is not always so simple, under New Jersey law, wills may be challenged under certain circumstances. Understanding the most common grounds for contesting a will can help you determine whether a challenge may be warranted.

Under N.J. Stat. § 3B:3-2 New Jersey requires wills to be in writing, signed by the testator, and witnessed by at least two individuals. Any will that fails to comply with these requirements may be invalid unless it qualifies as a holographic will, a document written entirely in the testator’s own handwriting and signed by them, without the need for witnesses.

One of the most frequent grounds for challenging a will is the lack of testamentary capacity. Under New Jersey law, there is a legal presumption that the testator (the deceased) was of sound mind when fully executing the will. Matter of Will of Liebl, 617 A.2d 266 (App. Div. 1992). However, this presumption can be refuted by clear and convincing evidence.

New Jersey courts have defined the gauge of testamentary capacity as “whether the testator can comprehend the property he is about to dispose of; the natural objects of his bounty; the meaning of the business in which he is engaged; the relation of each of the factors to the others, and the distribution that is made by the will.” Matter of Will of Liebl, 617 A.2d 266 (App. Div. 1992). The testator’s capacity is then assessed as of the date of the will’s execution.

Another frequent ground for challenging a will is undue influence. To successfully challenge a will under this doctrine, the contesting party must show that the undue influence consists of  “coercion or domination exercised to influence the testator may be moral, physical, or mental, or all three, but the coercion exerted upon the testator’s mind must be of a degree sufficient to turn the testator from disposing of his property according to his own desires by the substitution of the will of another which he is unable to resist or overcome.” Matter of Will of Liebl, 617 A.2d 266 (App. Div. 1992).

Furthermore, when a confidential relationship exists between the testator and beneficiary of the will, followed by suspicious circumstances, New Jersey law presumes undue influence, ultimately shifting the burden to the will’s proponent to deny this presumption. In re Prob. of Last Will & Testament of Catelli, 361 N.J. Super. 478 (App. Div. 2003).

Finally, fraud in connection with a will can be grounds for challenging its validity. N.J. Stat. § 3B:1-9. Any person injured by fraud may be able to obtain appropriate relief, however, proceedings must occur within two years of discovering the fraud.

Overall understanding these grounds can help you evaluate whether a will contest may be the appropriate option in your situation. If you have questions regarding a will or probate dispute in New Jersey or New York, please reach out to Porter Thomas Grabell & Baumwoll P.C. for a consultation.