
Marc J. Comer
Partner
848-482-8585 mcomer@sh-law.com
Partner
848-482-8585 mcomer@sh-law.com
Will contests in New Jersey are difficult to win, given the strong presumption that a properly executed will reflects the testator’s intent.
However, challenges based on lack of testamentary capacity and undue influence remain common, particularly where there are concerns about mental capacity or the involvement of interested parties.
This article outlines the key legal standards governing New Jersey will contests and how courts evaluate these claims.
New Jersey law establishes a strong presumption that a properly executed will is valid. To qualify as self-proving, a will must be signed by the testator in the presence of two witnesses and notarized to attest to the authenticity of the signatures.
Once a will satisfies these formalities, it is presumed to reflect the genuine intent of the testator. This presumption is significant because it places the initial burden of proof on the party contesting the will. A contestant must therefore provide sufficient evidence to overcome the assumption that the will is legally valid and properly executed.
Testamentary capacity refers to the mental ability of the testator to understand and execute a will. New Jersey courts apply a relatively low standard, reflecting the principle that individuals should retain autonomy over their estate plans absent clear evidence to the contrary.
To have testamentary capacity, a testator must understand the general nature of their estate, recognize the natural objects of their bounty, and comprehend the disposition they are making in the will.
Importantly, a testator does not need perfect memory or complete knowledge of every asset or beneficiary. A general understanding is sufficient to satisfy the legal standard.
The party contesting the will must provide evidence, often through medical records or expert testimony, demonstrating that the testator did not meet this standard at the time the will was executed.
Undue influence occurs when improper pressure is exerted on a testator, effectively overriding their independent judgment in disposing of their estate.
In New Jersey, the burden of proof initially rests with the contestant. However, that burden may shift in certain circumstances. As recognized by the New Jersey Supreme Court in , a presumption of undue influence may arise where there are both suspicious circumstances and a confidential relationship between the testator and the alleged influencer.
A confidential relationship exists where one party places trust in another, whether due to dependence, weakness, or a relationship in which reliance is naturally expected. Suspicious circumstances may include mental weakness, significant changes to a testamentary plan, involvement of a beneficiary in drafting or executing the will, or situations where the drafting attorney also represents the beneficiary.
When these elements are present, the burden shifts to the proponent of the will to demonstrate that the will was not the product of undue influence.
Evidence is critical in these disputes. Medical records, expert testimony, and documentation of the testator’s interactions with attorneys and beneficiaries can significantly impact the outcome.
Parties involved in a will contest should be aware that the ability to meet or rebut the applicable burden of proof often depends on the strength and quality of admissable evidence.
Proper documentation, evidence, and legal strategy can significantly impact the outcome of a will contest. Scarinci Hollenbeck’s attorneys are experienced in probate litigation as well as the planning and administration of wills, estates, and trusts.
This experience allows our team to evaluate contested issues effectively and provide guidance tailored to each client’s circumstances. For more information, please contact a member of the firm’s Estate & Trust Litigation practice.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

Director and officer liability increases sharply when a company is in financial distress. Decisions that would draw little attention in a healthy business can later be challenged by creditors, shareholders, bankruptcy trustees, and regulators as breaches of fiduciary duty, fraudulent transfers, or oversight failures. Understanding where that exposure comes from, and how to manage it, […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki

For developers pursuing battery energy storage system (BESS) projects, finding the right property is only the beginning. BESS site selection is as much a legal and transactional exercise as a real estate decision, with risk analysis central to the project’s ultimate success. Key Takeaways The core questions for BESS site selection in New York and […]
Author: Nicholas Wall

What should you expect when meeting a litigation attorney about a business dispute? You should expect to describe the dispute in your own words, hand over the most important documents, flag any deadlines or immediate threats, and leave with a clearer picture of the problem, what information is still needed, and the likely next steps. […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki

Arbitration resolves disputes privately before an arbitrator whose decision is usually final, while litigation resolves them in court with full rights of appeal. Whether a business ends up in arbitration or litigation is often decided when it signs the contract, long before any dispute arises. Key Takeaways When facing a contract dispute, carefully consider your […]
Author: Graham Staton

Can you own part of a business in New Jersey without a written agreement? Yes, it is possible. Under New Jersey’s Uniform Partnership Act, a partnership can arise when two or more people carry on a business as co-owners for profit, whether or not they ever intended to form one. Ownership doesn’t necessarily depend on […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki

For New Jersey businesses, crisis preparedness should be viewed as a legal and operational function, not simply an emergency-management exercise. A well-designed crisis response plan can help preserve evidence, protect confidential communications, meet reporting obligations, limit unnecessary exposure, and prevent an already difficult situation from becoming a larger legal problem. Key Takeaways A serious crisis […]
Author: Sean M. Pena
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!