Hi Everyone,

In Pace v. Steele, Pace argues that Darrell Steele procured Ralph Steele's estate with fraud and undue influence. Pace claims that Ralph was not of mental capacity to execute the will. However, the witnesses during the signing claim that Ralph "had not appeared to be in pain; that he had recognized [the witnesses]; that he had not appeared to be confused; and that he had seemed alert and attentive. These witnesses said that Ralph ... was 'okay mentally'" (Kubasek et al., 2020, p.1248). Alongside the doctor notes that Ralph was not suffering from dementia, Pace did not meet the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence.

The critical factor for Pace v. Steele was Ralph's mental capacity during the execution of his will. Specifically, whether Ralph suffered from dementia, and whether Ralph had enough mental capacity at the time to execute the will. Dr. Vellozo noted that at the time the will was signed, there was not a dementia diagnosis, while the nurses noted that "Ralph had 'mild difficulty with appropriate decision making'" (Kubasek et al., 2020, p.1247) and had intense pain after the signing. However, the witnesses said Ralph was mentally okay during the signing. Therefore, Ralph may have had enough mental capacity during the signing of the will.

I believe courts should investigate cases where there are doubts on the mental capacity of the testator. However, in cases such as Pace v. Steele, where the testator is proven to seemingly have enough mental capacity to sign the will during the signing, the courts should not spend any more resources investigating the case. If the testator cannot be proven to not be of mental capacity to sign the will, then there is a good chance the testator intended for the beneficiaries listed on the will.

Kubasek,N., Browne,M.N., Dhooge,L.J., Herron,D.J., Williamson,C., & Barkacs,L.L. (2020).Dynamic business law(5th ed.).

Need to reply to this discussion post