Insane Delusion
Sandra Grady
Insane delusion is the legal term of art in the common law tradition used to describe a false conception of reality that a testator of a will adheres to against all reason and evidence to the contrary. A will made by a testator suffering from an insane delusion that affects the provisions made in the will may fail in whole or in part. Only the portion of the will caused by the insane delusion fails, including potentially the entire will. Will contests often involve claims that the testator was suffering from an insane delusion.
An insane delusion is distinct from testamentary capacity. A testator might be suffering from an insane delusion but otherwise possess the requisite capacity to make a will. Similarly, an insane delusion is distinct from a mere mistake. If suffering from an insane delusion, a testator is not subject to change his or her mind regarding the delusion if presented with contrary evidence, whereas a mistake is capable of being corrected if the testator is told the truth. Additionally, while an insane delusion may cause portions of a will to fail, most courts will not reform or invalidate a will because of a mistake unless it was the result of fraud.[1]
The insane delusion concept was created in the 1826 British case Dew v. Clark. In that case, a father believed that his daughter was "the devil incarnate" and disinherited her in his will of 1818. After her father's death, evidence presented by the daughter showed that she was well known for her good disposition and that her father had falsely told others that he lavished his daughter with praise and wealth. The probate court found that the father's mindset when he made the 1818 will was normal in all respects except toward his daughter. The court found that his thoughts about her, "did and could only proceed from, and be founded in, insanity," a "partial insanity" that only extended to his thoughts about his daughter and caused him to disinherit her. The court said that this delusion caused the will to fail.[2]
In the 1854 case Addington v. Wilson, the Indiana Supreme Court held that a testator who disinherited his daughters because he believed them to be witches was not for that reason alone so insane as to deem him incapable of making a valid will. The court justified its decision by pointing to distinguished jurists and religious figures who affirmed the possibility of witchcraft; if these people's beliefs did not render them insane, neither did the testator's.[3]
In In re Robertson's Estate (1948), the Supreme Court of Oklahoma held that a testator who declared that he had "no children" and "no deceased children" in his will, when he actually had two living children, was suffering from an insane delusion, as the testator had "no rational basis whatsoever" to declare that he had no children.[4]
"Where a will, rational on its face, is shown to have been executed in legal form, the law presumes that the testator had testamentary capacity and that the will speaks [their] wishes." In re Meagher's Estate, 60 Wn.2d 691, 692, 375 P.2d 148 (1962). The party challenging the will bears the burden of establishing invalidity by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence. Meagher, 60 Wn.2d at 692. When determining whether a party meets this burden in the context of summary judgment, we "must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, a rational trier of fact could find that the nonmoving party supported [their] claim with clear, cogent, and convincing evidence." Woody v. Stapp, 146 Wn. App. 16, 22, 189 P.3d 807 (2008). A party presents clear, cogent and convincing evidence when they show the ultimate fact in issue to be highly probable. In re Estate of Watlack, 88 Wn. App. 603,610, 945 P.2d 1154 (1997).
A court may invalidate a will if a party shows by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence that at the time the testator executed the will, they suffered under an insane delusion that materially affected the disposition of the will. Watlack, 88 Wn. App. at 609-10. Regarding what constitutes an insane delusion, Washington courts have stated as follows:
An "insane delusion" is not well defined by case law. It has beendefined as a false belief, which would be incredible in the samecircumstances to the victim if [they] were of sound mind, and fromwhich [they] cannot be dissuaded by any evidence or argument. Itwas later described as a condition of such "aberration as indicatesan unsound or deranged condition of the mental faculties .... A belief resulting from a process of reasoning from existing facts will not be an insane delusion, regardless of whether the reasoning is imperfect or the conclusion illogical.
Watlack, 88 Wn. App. at 610. Thus, "[a] prejudice or dislike that a testator might have for a relative is not ground for setting aside a will unless the prejudice and dislike cannot be explained on any other ground than that of an insane delusion." In re Trust & Estate of Melter, 167 Wn. App. 285, 312 (2012).
First, as to delusions about the CIA, Indira presented evidence of her mother having paranoia and beliefs regarding the CIA around May 2015. Margaret, however, did not execute her will until July and Indira did not submit any evidence to suggest that such delusions existed at the time Margaret executed her July 2015 Will. Indira also failed to explain how any delusions about the CIA would cause Margaret to disinherit her.
It appears the daughter likely lost this case due to lack of proof, which would satisfy the requirements for a Will Contest. It does appear her mother experienced some mental health issues, but the daughter was unable to provide proof such mental health issues correlated with the decision to write her daughter out of the Will. It may well be there is more to the story than we will ever know. This case should be used merely as a reference point as to how difficult it can be to invalidate a Will.
Should you have any questions about this case or you have questions about potentially seeking to invalidate a Will, please feel free to contact Chris Thayer at (206) 805-1494 or CTh...@PivotalLawGroup.com
Insane delusion is a false sense of reality. Insane delusion is considered as a common law tradition used to describe a false conception of reality that a testator of a will adheres to against all reason and evidence on the contrary. The will made out of a state of insane delusion will be considered as void.
An insane delusion is an irrational belief. Where a testatrix has some actual grounds for the belief which she has, though regarded by others as wholly insufficient, the mere misapprehension of the facts or unreasonable and extravagant conclusions drawn there from do not establish the existence of such a delusion as will invalidate her will.[re Estate of Bonjean, 90 Ill. App. 3d 582, 584 (Ill. App. Ct. 3d Dist. 1980)].
Insane delusion is one of the lesser-used reasons to contest a will in Florida. Much like a lack of testamentary capacity, a will can be declared void if the court finds that the testator suffered from insane delusion at the time of the will's execution.
The Florida Supreme Court has defined insane delusion as "a fixed false belief without hypothesis, having no foundation in reality." In 2004, a Florida court expanded the definition, proclaiming an insane delusion to be "spontaneous conception and acceptance as a fact of that which has no real existence, and is persistently adhered to in spite of evidence and reason."
While any one of the above could have caused the testator to suffer an insane delusion, that alone is not enough to contest the will. You must be able to show that the insane delusion caused the testator to dispose of their property in a way that they otherwise would not have.
If you are defending a will or attempting to have a will voided in a Florida estate based on insane delusion, the estate litigation attorneys at DeLoach, Hofstra & Cavonis can examine the specifics of your case and explain your legal options. Simply fill out the quick contact form on this page to set up a consultation and get answers to your questions.
Although there can be overlap with cases involving elderly testators, where mental health issues such as dementia may play a part in undermining the decision to make a particular will, a striking feature of some of the cases is that relatively young and superficially capable testators can be subject to 'insane delusions' that undermine a will.
The existence of a mental disorder first needs to be established. Sometimes this will be evident from the medical history or records; in other cases, the only evidence of the disorder might be the delusions themselves.
The line between irrationality and delusion can be hard to draw. A person suffering from a delusion may express it in a perfectly coherent and reasonable way. If the listener does not know the truth they may have no idea that something is wrong - often the case when an independent solicitor prepares a will knowing only what their client tells them.
In those circumstances, the court will proceed on the basis that the will was validly made by a testator with capacity, and it will be for the person challenging the will to raise a real doubt to the contrary.
To do so, a claimant will need to establish both: (1) that the reasoning behind the will did not reflect reality; and (2) that this was caused by illness as opposed to (for example) a mistake which the testator would have accepted if it had been pointed out to them.
Can you identify a false belief and demonstrate why it is false? For example, if a testator believed that their children had severed contact, family members may be able to produce objective evidence to the contrary such as phone logs, text messages and birthday cards. It will be helpful if there is evidence that the testator had been challenged about the false belief and stuck to it, but this is not an essential evidential requirement: as confirmed in the 2022 appeal decision in Clitheroe v Bond, it is possible for the court to draw an inference that the testator will have been aware of clear evidence to the contrary and yet they maintained a false belief despite this.
4a15465005