Schaffer v. Fox

The evidence, which showed that the daughter dominated, belittled and manipulated the mother, was sufficient to support a jury finding that the deeds were invalid, because they were executed as a result of undue influence.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

The Fox brothers Alfred C. Fox; Leonard D. Fox; William R. Fox; Richard O. Fox; and Steven T. Fox sued to set aside quitclaim deeds given by their mother Emily M. Fox to her daughter Elaine Fox Schaffer and her grandson Harry M. Schaffer on the basis that the deeds were the product of undue influence exerted on Mrs. Fox by the Schaffers. The Schaffers appeal from a jury verdict setting aside the deeds. We affirm. 1. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, there was evidence to support setting aside and invalidating the deeds as the product of undue influence on Mrs. Fox when she executed the deeds.

“For undue influence to be sufficient to invalidate a deed, it must amount to deception or force and coercion that operates on the grantor when she is executing the deed so that the grantor is deprived of free agency and the will of another is substituted for that of the grantor.” McCormick v. Jeffers , 281 Ga. 264, 268 637 SE2d 666 2006 punctuation and citation omitted. Evidence showing only the opportunity to exercise undue influence is not sufficient. Cook v. Huff , 274 Ga. 186 552 SE2d 83 2001. Undue influence may take many forms and may operate through diverse channels. Moreover, its existence and effect can rarely be shown other than by circumstantial evidence. Therefore, when a deed is contested on the ground of undue influence, the attack may be supported by a wide range of testimony. . . . All of the circumstances including the conduct and demeanor of the parties with respect to each other, their comparative ages and mental capacity, and especially any physical and mental infirmity due to advanced age of the grantor, may be taken into consideration. Id. at 187 punctuation and citations omitted. “The question of whether a deed is the product of undue influence is generally for the fact-finder.” Id. at 186-187.

Schaffer v. Fox

The evidence, which showed that the daughter dominated, belittled and manipulated the mother, was sufficient to support a jury finding that the deeds were invalid, because they were executed as a result of undue influence.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report