The Oregon Supreme Court rules that the drafting of a will does not imply a promise by the drafting attorney to make the will invulnerable to legal challenge. Caba v. Barker (Or., No. S51769, Oct. 19, 2006).
Sandra Caba prepared a will for Laura Carnese on the suggestion of Charles Carnese, a relative of Ms. Carnese and a friend and former colleague of attorney Caba. The resulting will designated Mr. Carnese as executor of the estate and named him as both a beneficiary of a cash gift and a residual legatee. A will contest ensued following Ms. Carnese's death, and her estate subsequently settled for an amount that diminished each residual legatee's share by $103,570. The residual legatees sued attorney Caba, alleging that she had breached an implied promise to draft a will that would be invulnerable to legal challenge. The trial court granted attorney Caba's motion for summary judgment, finding any such implied promise did not extend to nonclients. The Oregon Court of Appeals reversed, ruling that because the legatees were 'classic 'intended' third-party beneficiaries' of attorney Caba's promise, she had a duty to 'act in a professionally competent manner[,]' which included drafting a will that was invulnerable to challenge.
The Oregon Supreme Court reverses the appeals court decision, finding no factual or legal basis for the allegation that attorney Caba's drafting of the will implied a promise to make the will invulnerable to legal challenge.
For the full text of this decision, go to: https://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/S51769.htm.
Did you know that the ElderLawAnswers database now contains summaries of more than 1,100 fully searchable elder law decisions dating back to 1993? To search the database, click here.
Subscribe to the Knowledge Bank.
