logo
logo
logo
MENU
Nicholas J. Dimakos
Member
Nicholas J. Dimakos
Visit Profile

Are Conversations from Beyond the Grave Admissible in Estate Litigation?

Following our post about vampire blogs, as the calendar turns to October and we approach Halloween, we’ll take a quick look at another other-worldly topic: how the decedent’s voice is admissible in estate litigation from beyond the grave.

Parties and other witnesses in estate litigation will frequently rely on or reference conversations they claim to have had with the deceased; and the attorney who drafted the document at issue, such as the decedent’s will or trust, is often viewed as a critical witness.  But these realities raise some basic questions. Isn’t the witness’ statement about what the decedent supposedly said a classic case of hearsay?  And aren’t the attorney’s communications with the decedent, who was, after all, his or her client, protected by the attorney-client privilege?

Answering the second question first, communications between the decedent and the attorney who drafted the will may be privileged, depending on the context. The executor or administrator of the decedent’s estate would have the ability to assert the privilege and prohibit the attorney from disclosing the communication.  However, there is an exception to the attorney—client privilege when the communication is relevant to a dispute involving parties who claim through the decedent.  Thus, in estate litigation, where parties are arguing over their respective interests in the decedent’s estate, the attorney-client privilege will not protect communications made between the decedent and the attorney who prepared the estate plan.

As for hearsay, communications relevant to estate litigation frequently involve the decedent’s state of mind or intent, and these types of communications often are admissible through exceptions to the rules disallowing hearsay.  Just because a statement is admissible, however, does not mean the court will necessarily credit it, so it may be important to have corroboration of the statement, such as documentation or multiple witnesses.  And, many statements are subject to a higher burden of proof under New Jersey’s “dead man’s statute,” which requires “clear and convincing evidence” of any statement or act of the decedent that is part of any claim asserted against the decedent’s personal representative, or part of the defense to a claim brought by the personal representative.  What satisfies the clear and convincing standard varies on a case-by-case basis.

If you have any questions about this post or any other related matter, please email me at njdimakos@norris-law.com.

Share
Related Posts
The Importance of Exculpatory Language in Litigation against Fiduciaries
Understanding Your Duties as Attorney in Fact, and Three Practical Tips to Comply With Them
Making a Will? Don’t Forget About Funeral Arrangements
Nicholas J. Dimakos
Member
Nicholas J. Dimakos
Visit Profile
Related Posts
The Importance of Exculpatory Language in Litigation against Fiduciaries
Understanding Your Duties as Attorney in Fact, and Three Practical Tips to Comply With Them
Making a Will? Don’t Forget About Funeral Arrangements
Share
Join our growing team
We are looking for quality attorneys to help us do more for our clients. At Norris McLaughlin, each attorney has the same opportunity to succeed whether you’re at the beginning of a career or pinnacle of the profession.
Subscribe to our content
Receive timely legal information
delivered to your inbox
Subscribe to our content
Receive timely legal information
delivered to your inbox
© 2021, Norris McLaughlin, P.A., All Rights Reserved. Attorney Advertising.
Meritas

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume you consent to our cookie policy. Learn more