Making Sense of Tortious
Interference with Inheritance

Litigating Tortious Interference in Iowa

Claimants who seek remedies for tortious interference with inheritance or inter vivos gifts must prove the following elements to prevail:

• The descendent intended to convey assets to the claimant upon death or make inter vivos gifts while alive and the claimant reasonably expected to take the property from the deceased.
• Tortious Act. The defendant used fraud, undue influence, duress or defamation to pressure, coerce or persuade the testator into altering his will or reneging on handing over a gift.
• Intentional Wrongdoing. Proof showing the defendant’s wrongful interference was intentional (not negligent).
• Had the defendant not intentionally engaged in tortious conduct, the testator would have followed through with his true intent, and the claimant would have lawfully received her property.
• The defendant’s wrongful act caused the claimant to suffer actual and consequential financial or emotional damages.

Post Probate Litigation

Tortious interference complaints are unlike will challenges or probate disputes because the claimants often learn about the defendant’s wrongful conduct long after the court closes probate and distributes the deceased’s assets.

Instead of petitioning the courts to reopen and repeat probate proceedings, expert estate dispute litigators file actions against the wrongdoers themselves and attack the property they wrongfully obtained in probate.

Exhausting All Remedies in Probate First

Iowa statutes affirm the tortious interference with inheritance complaint is only actionable when no “adequate...or alternative remedy” was available to the plaintiff in probate court.

This means that claimants must first exhaust all means to seek adequate relief for the defendant’s wrongdoing in probate proceedings before pursuing action.

The courts will therefore bar tortious interference with heritance complaints if the claimant had a fair opportunity to attack the decedent’s will in probate and failed to seek that relief.

However, inter vivos gifts recipients seeking remedies for non-delivery of property due to the defendant’s wrongful conduct may file tortious interference complaints because the issue in controversy does not involve the validity of will in probate.

Tortious Interference with Heritance Damages

Plaintiffs can sue wrongdoers for both compensatory and punitive damages. Inter vivo gift claimants may likewise procure equitable remedies in the form of constructive trusts placed upon the non-delivered gifts.

The advantage therefore in pursuing tortious interference action is that besides actual damages, the defendant’s intentional conduct allows for reasonable punitive damage awards that may punish wrongdoers by compelling them to pay up to three to five times the amount of actual damages.

Example of Tortious Interference with Inheritance

Mike knows that he and his sister Mary will each inherit one-half of their father’s family home.  Mike is also his dad’s legal caregiver. Over time, Mike uses his influence and control over his dad to pressure him into changing his will, making Mike the sole beneficiary of the estate. Dad does what Mike wants because he believes his son will stop caring for him if he doesn’t alter the will.

Mary hires a well-practiced tortious interference with inheritance attorney at the Smith Law Firm in Iowa to sue Mike. She wins her claim, and the courts award her compensatory damages equal to half the value of her dad’s home plus three hundred percent in punitive damages to punish Mike for his conduct.