Alaska Civil Pattern Jury Instruction 26.10B

The Contestant claims the will is invalid because the Maker signed it when [he] [she] was under the undue influence of [name of alleged influencer].

You must decide whether it is more likely true than not true that:

(1) [name of alleged influencer] was the principal or sole beneficiary of the will; and

(2) [name of alleged influencer] and the Maker had a confidential relationship; and

(3) [name of alleged influencer] participated in the drafting of the will.

A "confidential relationship" existed between [name of alleged influencer] and [name of testator] if [name of testator] placed special trust and confidence in the integrity and fidelity of [name of alleged influencer] so that the [name of alleged influencer] was, in fairness and good conscience, bound to act in good faith and with due regard to the interests of [name of testator]. Examples of some relations that are confidential include that of attorney and client, doctor and patient, and a person holding a power of attorney over someone else's property.

[If you decide that all three of these things are more likely true than not true, then the law requires that you also accept as true that the Maker made [his] [her] will under the undue influence of [name of alleged influencer] and you must return a verdict for the Contestant.]

[If you decide that all three of these things are more likely true than not true, then you may infer that the Maker made [his] [her] will under the undue influence of [name of alleged influencer]. However, you are not required to do so.]

If you decide otherwise, you must evaluate all the evidence in order to decide whether [name of alleged influencer] so influenced the Maker that [he] [she] made a will that [he] [she] would not have made if left to the free exercise of [his] [her] own judgment and wishes. Mere general influence is not undue influence.

In determining this issue, you should consider all of the surrounding circumstances, including such factors as:

(1) the Maker's age and mental condition;

(2) whether the relationship between them was one in which the Maker put special confidence and trust in [name of undue influencer];

(3) whether [name of alleged influencer] was the dominant party in the relationship;

(4) [name of alleged influencer]'s opportunity to exercise undue influence;

(5) whether [name of alleged influencer] participated in the drafting and signing of the will;

(6) whether the will seemed to have been executed for [name of alleged influencer]'s benefit or profit; and

(7) whether [name of alleged influencer] had possession of the will after its execution.

If you decide that it is more likely true than not true that there was undue influence, you must return a verdict for the Contestant. Otherwise, you must find that there was no undue influence and return a verdict for the Proponent.