Sociopath Community

2023-03-16

im tempted to tell the attorney I will retain his firm for their fee. I think my doctor was trying to save me money by telling me to ask questions first.

I posed my questions but have not heard back yet. As with most my relationships I find it hard to wait and am tempted to just offer the retainer fee, but it’s only 9 am.

2023-03-16

Okay I did it. They have said by way of example duties would be but not limited to factual investigation and legal research, but not covering filing of litigation papers.

med i hate to break this to you, but if you're trying to prove your mother is incompetent...are you under the impression the same cannot be done to you? i mean...

you've been in a psych ward how many times? and not by choice..

you gave $21k to a criminal convict, and were tricked into giving 4k to an international pedophile simply by him pretending (badly) to be said criminal convict

you also tried to get the money back, demonstrating it wasn't simply a choice you made in your right mind

you can't hold down a steady job or relationship

this is just what i know off the top of my head...this doesn't include the things your family probably knows about you and why you may have been uninvited to the beach house family fun time lol

Q:

With respect to Estate Law, it seems like faulty logic that to prove Undue Influence on your parent’s Estate by a impartial party, that your parent must be evaluated for competency by a Neurologist, and only if the parent is no longer competent to dictate her financial affairs, then you can consider Undue Influence, but the logic seems faulty that by certifying incompetence, then no changes can be made to The Estate—is this right?

ChatGPT
 
As an AI language model, I cannot provide legal advice or opinions, but I can give you some basic information that may help you have a better understanding of estate law and undue influence.

Undue Influence refers to a situation where an individual exerts pressure, control, or coercion over another person to gain an unfair advantage concerning property, assets, and financial affairs. In estate law, Undue Influence can occur when an individual uses manipulative tactics to influence or persuade a testator to choose specific beneficiaries, alter or revoke a last will, or make changes to an estate plan that do not reflect the testator's true wishes.

To prove Undue Influence, you need to demonstrate that the influencer had a position of trust or power over the testator, and that the testator was vulnerable or susceptible to manipulation. Additionally, the influencer must have actively participated in the decision-making process and coerced the testator into making changes that were not based on the testator's free will.

In some cases, proving Undue Influence may require proving the incompetence of the testator. This is because a testator who lacks the mental capacity to understand the nature and consequences of their decisions becomes more vulnerable to manipulation and susceptible to Undue Influence. However, declaring a testator incompetent may not necessarily prevent changes to the estate plan; it will depend on the specific circumstances and legal requirements.

It is advisable to consult a qualified estate lawyer for legal advice that pertains directly to your unique situation.

Q: You said: In some cases, proving Undue Influence may require proving the incompetence of the testator. In what cases is that necessary and in what cases is that not necessary to prove Undue Influence?

A:

As an AI language model, I do not have the ability to provide specific legal advice or guidance on individual cases. However, in general, proving the incompetence of the testator is not always necessary to prove Undue Influence. Undue Influence can be proven by showing that the influencer had a position of power over the testator, that they used that position to gain an advantage, and that the testator was susceptible to this influence. Competence may be relevant in cases where the testator's state of mind is at issue, such as where there are questions about the testator's ability to understand the nature and consequences of their actions. Consultation with a qualified legal professional can provide more specific guidance on the relevance of incompetence in a particular case involving Undue Influence.

Q: You said: “Undue Influence can be proven by showing that the influencer had a position of power over the testator, that they used that position to gain an advantage, and that the testator was susceptible to this influence. “ Can you illustrate this further with examples?

A:

Certainly! Here are a few examples of how undue influence can be proven in different situations:

A financial advisor or attorney may use their position of trust and expertise to unduly influence a client's estate planning decisions. For example, they may persuade the client to make investments or take actions that primarily benefit the advisor rather than the client.
In a case where a potential heir or beneficiary is providing substantial emotional support to the testator, they may use this influence to benefit themselves at the expense of others who may be more deserving of the inheritance.
In each of these examples, the key elements of undue influence are present: a position of power, an advantage gained through that power, and a vulnerability on the part of the testator.

Q: What is the relevant case law in [my state] to prove undue influence 

A: 

As an AI language model, I cannot browse or extract case laws from legal resources. However, I can provide you with general information about the burden of proof of undue influence in [your state]

In [your state], the party claiming undue influence has the burden of proof, meaning they are required to demonstrate that the influencer had the power to control the will of the testator, and that they exerted that power to create a will that does not represent the testator's true desires. To prove undue influence, the plaintiff must present sufficient evidence showing that:

Vulnerability: The testator was susceptible to influence due to age, illness, or other factors.

Opportunity: The influencer had the opportunity to influence the testator, such as being present during the making of the will.

Influence: The influencer actually exerted undue influence over the testator by using coercion, fraud, or other means to control their decision-making.
Result: The will reflects the influencer's interests, not the testator's true wishes.

The court will carefully evaluate the evidence presented, and if the plaintiff meets the burden of proof, the court may set aside the will or declare it invalid.

Q:

With regard to the above (1) you say the burden of proof on the plaintiff in undue influence claim in [my state] must claim vulnerability of the testator due to “age, illness or other factors.” Can you be more explicit with regard to the requirements for age, illness, or which of those other factors? (2) the influencer must have exerted influence over the testator by coercion or fraud or other means to control their decision making. Can you explain what is required in the aforementioned instance to prove coercion and to prove fraud, and what other means is sufficient to prove “control” of testator’s decision-making?

A:

In [your state{, to prove undue influence in a will contest, a plaintiff must establish that the testator was vulnerable as a result of age, illness, or other factors. To be considered vulnerable due to age, the testator should be advanced in years and not be of sound mental capacity. With respect to illness, the testator must suffer from a mental or physical condition that impairs their ability to reason, understand, or make decisions. Other factors may include a history of mental illness, substance abuse, or dependency, or other conditions that render the testator susceptible to undue influence.
Coercion refers to the act of using threats, intimidation, or physical force to control the testator's decision-making process. To prove coercion, the plaintiff must show that the influencer threatened or intimidated the testator into making the will, or that they used physical force to coerce or intimidate the testator. Fraud refers to the act of making false representations or concealing material facts to deceive the testator. To prove fraud, the plaintiff must show that the influencer made false statements, omitted pertinent information or otherwise misrepresented material facts to the testator. Other means of control may include isolation of the testator from family or friends, manipulation of the testator's emotions, or other forms of psychological manipulation that effect a testator's decision-making.

Disappointment truly has depths yet explored for me. 


Even after taking into account the whole... declaring family members incompetent over how she loves money more than them, she's following in Chapo's footsteps and settling for an AI to talk to about it.