Lines are Available 24/7
Se Habla Español
Lines are Available 24/7
Se Habla Español
Lines are Available 24/7
Se Habla Español
Lines are Available 24/7
Se Habla Español
Not every will reflects the true wishes of the person who signed it. In Florida, interested parties have the right to challenge the validity of a will through a formal legal proceeding known as a will contest. However, will contests are governed by strict substantive requirements, procedural rules, and deadlines that must be followed precisely.
Florida law recognizes several grounds for contesting a will, including lack of testamentary capacity, undue influence, fraud, duress, improper execution, and revocation. Each ground carries its own evidentiary requirements and burden of proof. Understanding these requirements is essential whether you are considering a will contest or defending against one.
A will contest challenges the legal validity of a will that has been offered for probate. Under Florida law, the most common grounds for contesting a will include lack of testamentary capacity, undue influence, fraud, duress, improper execution, and revocation. These grounds are not mutually exclusive, and multiple grounds are often raised in the same proceeding.
Florida Statutes Section 732.501 provides that any person who is of sound mind and who is either 18 or more years of age or an emancipated minor may make a will. The requirement of “sound mind” is the basis for testamentary capacity challenges.
Florida courts apply a three-part test to determine whether a testator had the requisite capacity. As the Second District Court of Appeal held in In re Bailey’s Estate, 122 So. 2d 243 (Fla. 2d DCA 1960), sound mind means the testator had the ability to mentally understand in a general way: (1) the nature and extent of the property to be disposed of, (2) the testator’s relation to those who would naturally claim a substantial benefit from the will, and (3) a general understanding of the practical effect of the will as executed. This test has been consistently applied across Florida’s appellate courts. See also In re Estate of Edwards, 433 So. 2d 1349 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983); American Red Cross v. Estate of Haynsworth, 708 So. 2d 602 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998).
Critically, testamentary capacity is measured at the precise moment of will execution, not at any other time. The First District Court of Appeal held in York v. Smith, 385 So. 2d 1110 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980), that testamentary capacity is required only when the testator makes the will, and that incapacity at a later time is inconsequential. This means that evidence of mental decline before or after execution, while potentially relevant, is not determinative.
The burden of proving lack of testamentary capacity is heavy. As the Fourth District Court of Appeal stated in Hendershaw v. Estate of Hendershaw, 763 So. 2d 482 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000), the burden of invalidating a will because of lack of testamentary capacity must be sustained by a preponderance of the evidence. Evidence that may support a capacity challenge includes medical records, expert testimony regarding the testator’s cognitive condition, testimony from witnesses who observed the testator around the time of execution, and evidence regarding medications that may have affected the testator’s mental state. See In re Coles’ Estate, 205 So. 2d 554 (Fla. 2d DCA 1968) (finding lack of capacity where testator signed will less than two hours after receiving a narcotic pain medication injection).
Undue influence is one of the most frequently litigated grounds for will contests in Florida. It involves conduct that overpowers the testator’s free will and substitutes the wishes of another person for those of the testator.
Florida law creates a powerful rebuttable presumption of undue influence under specific circumstances. The Florida Supreme Court established in In re Carpenter’s Estate, 253 So. 2d 697 (Fla. 1971), that if a substantial beneficiary under a will occupies a confidential relationship with the testator and is active in procuring the contested will, the presumption of undue influence arises.
This presumption requires three elements: (1) a substantial beneficiary under the will, (2) a confidential relationship between the beneficiary and the testator, and (3) active procurement of the will by the beneficiary. However, the Second District Court of Appeal clarified in RBC Ministries v. Tompkins, 974 So. 2d 569 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008), that contestants are not required to prove all of the listed criteria for active procurement, noting that it will be the rare case in which all the criteria will be present.
The definition of confidential relationship is broad. The Fifth District Court of Appeal explained in Thomas for Fennell v. Lampkin, 470 So. 2d 37 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985), that the term “confidential relationship” is extremely broad and encompasses virtually all relationships of trust and dependence. Courts have found confidential relationships where parties live together, are related by blood, and where a relationship of dependency exists.
There is, however, a notable exception for spousal relationships. The Florida Supreme Court held in Goertner v. Gardiner that the confidential relationship between a husband and wife is not one that may be considered in the law governing will contests. The Third District confirmed this exception remains in effect in Tarsagian v. Watt, 402 So. 2d 471 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981).
When the presumption of undue influence arises, it operates as a burden-shifting mechanism. Florida Statutes Section 733.107(2) provides that the presumption implements public policy against abuse of fiduciary or confidential relationships and is a presumption shifting the burden of proof under Sections 90.301 through 90.304 of the Florida Evidence Code.
The Fifth District Court of Appeal explained in Hack v. Janes, 878 So. 2d 440 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004), that the 2002 amendment to Section 733.107 was intended to incorporate the Evidence Code and require a shifting of the burden of proof after the presumption arises. When the presumption is triggered, the will proponent must come forward with evidence providing a reasonable explanation for the beneficiary’s active role in the testator’s affairs and in the preparation of the will. In re Carpenter’s Estate, 253 So. 2d at 697.
Fraud as a ground for will contest requires proof that an intentional misrepresentation induced the testator to execute the will or include specific provisions. Florida courts distinguish between two types of fraud in will contests. Intrinsic fraud affects the will’s contents directly, such as misrepresenting the character or actions of a beneficiary to the testator. Extrinsic fraud involves conduct that prevents a will contest from being brought, such as concealing the existence of a will or misleading interested parties about the probate proceedings.
The Fourth District Court of Appeal addressed this distinction in Ebeling v. Voltz, 454 So. 2d 783 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984), recognizing that extrinsic fraud in the prevention of the will contest, as opposed to fraud in the making of the will, may provide an additional basis for relief.
Duress requires proof that external pressure destroyed the testator’s free will. The Third District Court of Appeal defined duress in City of Miami v. Kory, 394 So. 2d 494 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), as a condition of mind produced by an improper external pressure or influence that practically destroys the free agency of a party and causes the person to act not of their own volition. The court also emphasized that a threatened action cannot constitute duress when adequate legal remedies are available to challenge it.
Florida Statutes Section 732.502 establishes strict formal requirements for will execution. A valid will must be in writing and signed by the testator at the end, or the testator’s name must be subscribed at the end by another person in the testator’s presence and at the testator’s direction. The signing or acknowledgment must occur in the presence of at least two attesting witnesses, and the witnesses must sign the will in the presence of the testator and in the presence of each other.
Florida courts enforce strict compliance with these requirements. There is no “substantial compliance” doctrine in Florida will execution law. Any failure to meet the precise statutory requirements can invalidate the will, regardless of how clearly the testator’s wishes may be expressed. The Second District held in Kelly v. Lindenau, 223 So. 3d 1074 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017), that a constructive trust remedy is not appropriate where there is an error in the execution of the document. The Third District reinforced in Zaidman v. Zaidman, 305 So. 3d 330 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020), that strict compliance with the will statutes is required.
A will may be challenged on the ground that it was revoked prior to the testator’s death. Florida law provides two primary methods of revocation. Under Section 732.505, Florida Statutes, a will may be revoked by a subsequent inconsistent will or codicil, or by a subsequent will, codicil, or other writing executed with the same formalities required for will execution that declares the revocation. Under Section 732.506, a will may be revoked by a physical act, including burning, tearing, canceling, defacing, obliterating, or destroying the will with the intent and for the purpose of revocation.
Revocation requires both an act and the intent to revoke. The Third District emphasized in In re Estate of Dickson, 590 So. 2d 471 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991), that in order to revoke a valid will, there must be a joint operation of act and intention to revoke. Neither the act alone nor the intent alone is sufficient. The Third District further held in Zaidman v. Zaidman, 305 So. 3d 330 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020), that strict compliance with the will statutes is required in order to effectuate a revocation.
For electronic wills, Florida Statutes Section 732.506 provides specific procedures for revocation, requiring deleting, canceling, rendering unreadable, or obliterating the electronic will with the intent and for the purpose of revocation, as proved by clear and convincing evidence.
Florida Statutes Section 733.107 establishes the burden of proof framework for will contests. The statute provides that in all proceedings contesting the validity of a will, the burden is first on the proponent of the will to establish prima facie its formal execution and attestation. Once this initial burden is met, the burden shifts to the contestant to establish the grounds on which probate of the will is opposed or revocation is sought.
The standard of proof for will contests is preponderance of the evidence. This applies to all grounds, including lack of capacity, undue influence, fraud, duress, and improper execution. However, when the presumption of undue influence arises under Section 733.107(2), the burden of proof shifts to the will proponent to overcome the presumption.
As a practical matter, will contests often involve conflicting testimony from witnesses with competing interests. The contestant must present sufficient evidence to overcome the natural presumption of validity that attaches to a will that has been properly offered for probate. Courts have consistently held that the burden is heavy, particularly in capacity cases.
Perhaps the most critical practical consideration in any will contest is the strict deadline for filing. Florida Statutes Section 733.212 requires that any interested person on whom a copy of the notice of administration is served must file any objection challenging the validity of the will on or before three months after the date of service. This deadline is absolute: those who fail to timely object will have their objections forever barred.
The statute provides extremely limited grounds for extension. The three-month period may only be extended for estoppel based upon a misstatement by the personal representative regarding the time period within which an objection must be filed. It may not be extended for any other reason, including affirmative representation, failure to disclose information, or misconduct by the personal representative or any other person.
Even if the three-month deadline does not apply because the interested person was not served with notice of administration, the statute establishes an absolute outer limit. All objections to the validity of a will must be filed no later than the earlier of the entry of an order of final discharge of the personal representative or one year after service of the notice of administration.
These compressed deadlines make immediate action essential. From the moment you receive a notice of administration, the clock is running. Gathering evidence, retaining counsel, evaluating the strength of potential claims, and preparing a formal objection all must occur within a three-month window that cannot be extended in most circumstances.
Will contests are adversary proceedings under the Florida Probate Rules, which means the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure apply. This gives both sides access to discovery tools including depositions, interrogatories, and requests for production of documents. These tools are essential for building or defending against a will contest, particularly in cases involving undue influence where the key evidence often involves the dynamics of the relationship between the testator and the beneficiary.
Evidence preservation is critical. Medical records documenting the testator’s cognitive condition around the time of execution are essential for capacity challenges. Financial records may reveal patterns of control or dependency relevant to undue influence claims. Testimony from witnesses who observed the testator during the relevant period, including caregivers, friends, neighbors, and medical professionals, can be decisive.
It is also important to understand that a will may be partially invalid. If undue influence or fraud affects certain provisions of a will but not others, the court may invalidate only the affected provisions while admitting the remainder to probate. Similarly, a will contest may result in the admission of an earlier will rather than intestate succession.
If you believe a will does not reflect the true wishes of your loved one, or if you need to defend a will against a contest, Zoecklein Law, P.A. can help. Our firm has extensive experience litigating will contests and probate disputes in Florida courts, including appellate proceedings before Florida’s District Courts of Appeal. We handle cases involving lack of capacity, undue influence, fraud, improper execution, and all other grounds for challenging or defending a will.
The three-month deadline under Section 733.212 means time is not on your side. If you have received a notice of administration and believe you have grounds to contest a will, contact us immediately for a free consultation. Zoecklein Law, P.A. represents clients throughout the State of Florida.
———
What are the grounds for contesting a will in Florida?
Florida law recognizes several grounds for contesting a will, including lack of testamentary capacity under Fla. Stat. § 732.501, undue influence, fraud, duress, improper execution under Fla. Stat. § 732.502, and revocation under Fla. Stat. §§ 732.505–732.506. A will contest may be based on one or more of these grounds simultaneously. Each requires the contestant to prove the claim by a preponderance of the evidence under the framework established in Fla. Stat. § 733.107.
What is the presumption of undue influence in a Florida will contest?
Under Florida law, a rebuttable presumption of undue influence arises when a substantial beneficiary under a will occupies a confidential relationship with the testator and is active in procuring the contested will. In re Carpenter’s Estate, 253 So. 2d 697 (Fla. 1971). When the presumption arises, it shifts the burden of proof to the will proponent to demonstrate that the will was not the product of undue influence. Fla. Stat. § 733.107(2).
How long do you have to contest a will in Florida?
Under Fla. Stat. § 733.212, any interested person who receives a copy of the notice of administration must file their objection within three months of service. This deadline is strictly enforced and can only be extended for estoppel based on a misstatement by the personal representative about the filing deadline. The absolute outer limit for all objections is the earlier of the order of final discharge or one year after service of the notice of administration.
What does testamentary capacity mean in Florida?
Under Fla. Stat. § 732.501, a testator must be of “sound mind” to execute a valid will. Florida courts define sound mind as the ability to understand in a general way: (1) the nature and extent of the property being disposed of, (2) the testator’s relationship to those who would naturally claim a benefit from the will, and (3) the practical effect of the will as executed. In re Bailey’s Estate, 122 So. 2d 243 (Fla. 2d DCA 1960). Capacity is measured at the precise moment of will execution.
What are the requirements for a valid will in Florida?
Under Fla. Stat. § 732.502, a valid Florida will must be in writing, signed by the testator at the end (or by another person at the testator’s direction and in the testator’s presence), and the signing must occur in the presence of at least two attesting witnesses who must also sign in the presence of the testator and each other. Florida courts require strict compliance with these formalities. Any deviation can invalidate the will entirely.
Can you partially contest a will in Florida?
Yes. If undue influence or fraud affects only certain provisions of a will, the court may invalidate those provisions while admitting the remainder of the will to probate. A successful will contest does not necessarily result in intestate succession. It may result in the probate of an earlier valid will or invalidation of only the affected provisions.
Who can contest a will in Florida?
Under Florida law, only an “interested person” may contest a will. This generally includes beneficiaries named in the will, beneficiaries named in a prior will, and heirs at law who would inherit under Florida’s intestacy statutes if the will were found invalid. A person must have a material interest in the outcome of the proceeding to have standing to bring a will contest.
What is the burden of proof in a Florida will contest?
Under Fla. Stat. § 733.107, the proponent of the will must first establish prima facie its formal execution and attestation. Once that is shown, the burden shifts to the contestant to prove the grounds for the contest by a preponderance of the evidence. When the presumption of undue influence arises, the burden shifts back to the proponent to overcome the presumption.
