Facts

According to petitioners' counsel: Jake Yourczek executed an intervivos trust (Trust) in 1999. The attorney held a family meeting with all siblings present. The Trust provided that the distribution was to be equal amongst his living children at the time of Jake's death. Respondent, Jake's youngest daughter, had a confidential relationship with Jake. She had Jake move into her home. The two had financial dealings, including Jake borrowing money to loan to respondent, Jake co-signing real estate loans with respondent, respondent having the ability to write checks on Jake's accounts and assisting in Jake's healthcare decisions.

In 2003, respondent took Jake, age 89, to her attorney to amend his Trust. The respondent had Jake bring a handwritten note to the meeting instructing the attorney to leave a large portion of the estate to the respondent. The attorney then met with Jake privately and Jake denied the note and said to treat all the children equally. A few weeks later, the respondent brought Jake back to the attorney. The attorney met separately with Jake and confirmed that Jake wanted a substantial portion of his estate to go to the respondent. The attorney believed Jake was competent to make the amendment and Jake executed the amendment. Once Jake passed away, the respondent failed to account for the Trust property's rental income and kept the rent proceeds for herself.

PETITIONERS' CONTENTIONS:
The petitioner contended the amendment was procured by respondent through undue influence and that respondent failed to account for the Trust's income and had wrongfully withheld the Trust income for herself.

RESPONDENT'S CONTENTIONS:
The respondent contended that Jake wanted to leave the bulk of his assets to her and that the amendment was valid. Respondent asserted that she had not unduly influenced Jake nor had she wrongfully kept the Trust property's rental income for herself.

Result

The court ruled that the amendment was invalid due to the undue influence of respondent over Jake. The court removed the respondent as co-trustee under the Trust and found that respondent owed the Trust $168,332 for waste, wrongful withholding of Trust property's rent, double damages and prejudgment interest. The court also awarded attorney fees of $76,789.

Other Information

FILING DATE: Aug. 07, 2006.