Connecticut
How Bennett v. Bennett applies in Connecticut: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Wills & Trusts.
Connecticut follows the principles established in Bennett v. Bennett regarding the enforcement of no-contest clauses in wills and trusts. Such clauses are generally enforceable unless subjected to exceptions as outlined in state law.
In Connecticut, no-contest clauses are enforceable unless the contest is based on probable cause or is brought in good faith.
The court determined that a no-contest clause was unenforceable due to the contestant's good faith belief in their entitlement.
The court clarified that no-contest clauses can be invalidated if the contest is based on claims of undue influence or lack of capacity.
The court emphasized the need for a clear expression of intent in no-contest clauses to determine enforceability.
Connecticut's approach is consistent with federal standards, which also recognize the validity of no-contest clauses, emphasizing enforcement unless there's probable cause. However, some federal jurisdictions may apply a more lenient standard for enforcement compared to Connecticut's specific rules.
Understanding the enforceability of no-contest clauses and the exceptions in Connecticut is crucial for the bar exam, particularly in Wills & Trusts questions.