A recent Stone County, Mississippi, probate case involved allegations that the estate administrators were coerced into signing an agreed order. Eldon Ladner and his daughter served as co-administrators of the Estates of Lula Mae Davis and John Davis. Eldon also served as conservator of the Estate of Daniel M. Thompson and Louise Thompson, deceased, and as administrator of the Estate of Daniel Thompson.
Alberta O’Neill didn’t like the way Eldon and his daughter were handling the various estates. She filed documents asking for their removal and requesting an accounting of each estate. The court ordered the accounting, which the administrators provided. There seems to have been some information missing, though, due to their attorney’s closing of his law practice.
The case eventually went to trial, but the court continued the proceeding to a later date. In the interim, the parties reached an agreed order, which was approved by the chancery court. The administrators then changed their mind and asked the court to set aside the agreed order. The administrators claimed that the threat of criminal charges had coerced them into signing the agreed order.
The administrators’ duress claim was somewhat novel. They claimed that the duress was caused by their attorney when the attorney gave them advice regarding the matter. The attorney apparently informed the administrators of the possibility of criminal action, loss of job, and doomed political aspirations. The administrators claimed that this advice created so much fear as to overcome their free will and coerce them into signing the agreed order.
After a hearing, the Stone County Chancery Court determined that the administrators had signed the agreed order by their own free will and refused to set it aside. On appeal, the Supreme Court had to determine whether judgment was the product of duress or whether it was executed voluntarily.
Normal stress associated with signing an agreement is not duress. For an agreement to be set aside, the duress must have been so severe as to override the volition of the party to the agreement. Applying this standard to the case, the Supreme Court did not find sufficient evidence that the administrators were under duress when they signed the agreement.
In re Estate of Davis v. O’Neill, 2009-CA-01025-SCT (Aug. 19, 2010).
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.