What’s “Undue Influence” in the Transfer of a Deed? Massachusetts Appeals Court Speaks

A homeowner transfers a deed. But someone else in the deed transferor’s circle isn’t too happy about who got it.

Was the deed transfer fair? Yes, it was, if that’s how the owner wanted to pass property along. Of course, that assumes that the person signing the deed away knows the property’s value, and the consequences of the transfer. But what if someone says the person — often someone who’s elderly, or now deceased — was pressured to sign the deed?

What Kind of Pressure Can Invalidate a Deed?

Undue influence is the use of improper pressure to get someone to do something. But when would a court decide a deed transfer was, in fact, made under improper pressure? After all, a deed holder’s decision to transfer a property interest is presumed valid.

A recent Massachusetts court case speaks to the matter. The case is Erikson v. Erikson, 105 Mass. App. Ct. 1115 (Feb. 24, 2025).

In Massachusetts, the Trial Court system has a Land Court department, which handles cases involving deeds and land use throughout the state. The Land Court rather than the Probate Court is the proper venue for quieting a title (setting aside a deed transfer).

The Land Court had to decide whether to invalidate a deed that named two children of a certain Bruce. The Land Court decided that Bruce applied undue influence to transfer the deed to his kids, when Bruce’s mother intended for the home to go to Wendy — Bruce’s sibling.

The Appeals Court of Massachusetts agreed.

The facts at issue were these:

• In 1985, Wendy’s parents told her they were buying a home for her. It would be her inheritance.

• From 1985 on, Wendy lived in and maintained the property, and paid all relevant taxes and bills.

• Two decades later, Wendy’s mother, now widowed and facing declining health at age 81, moved in with Bruce, her son. Without Wendy’s knowledge, the mother soon transferred the deed to the home Wendy lived in to Bruce’s small children. The mother kept a life estate interest.

• In May 2020, Doris died without leaving a will.

Needless to say, once Doris died, Wendy learned that the home had been transferred out from under her back in 2006. Wendy was disabled and had no other place to go.

Here’s How the Massachusetts Court Defines Undue Influence

In a five-day trial (yes, it’s complicated!) by Zoom, a judge determined Bruce had exerted undue influence over his mother to sign the transfer to Bruce’s kids. Wendy prevailed. Bruce appealed, but the appeals court affirmed the decision.

Here’s how the court defined undue influence, and found it in this case:

• The transfer was “unnatural.” (Here, the recipients of the property were just six years old, whereas Wendy had occupied the home for two decades. And the life estate made no sense as the mother wasn’t living on the transferred property; Wendy was.)

• The person who made the transfer was “susceptible” to undue influence. (The facts brought to the court showed that Bruce’s mother was failing physically and cognitively, and relied on Bruce for shelter and care.)

• There was an opportunity to exercise undue influence. (Here, that opportunity was very much present. Bruce’s mother lived with Bruce for more than a year, in a period of declining health.)

• The person who had the opportunity used it, to take improper advantage. (The court determined that such was the case with Bruce, who stood to gain by using the home as the inheritance for his own children.)

Every day, people put improper pressure on people in vulnerable positions. This is how one state deals with theirs.

Undue Influence, Generally Speaking: Not Easily Proven

State courts do look at what other states decide in such cases, but Massachusetts court decisions aren’t binding in other states.

As a general matter, courts don’t look kindly on the financial exploitation of vulnerable people. But the result of a court battle would hinge on state case law, applied to the facts on the case brought to the court to decide. (Even the actions of the parties in court can bear on the outcomes. At one point in the Massachusetts Zoom proceedings, the judge could see Bruce talking with someone else, breaking the rules the court had laid out for the calls. Bruce denied it, ruining his testimony’s credibility.)

First, a deed transfer is void from the start if the transferor was declared incompetent by a court before signing over the document.

If not, then the facts must be carefully examined. Questions for the fact-finder might be: How was the person vulnerable? What was the parties’ relationship? What facts made the transfer unreasonable? The lawyer challenging the transfer might need to introduce experts. Expert witnesses help the court understand a person’s vulnerability, or lack of capacity to sign. If the weight of the evidence demonstrates a lack of capacity (which is often a factor in undue influence), the lawyer can ask the court to invalidate a recorded deed. In a great many cases, the court won’t invalidate the transfer, because of insufficient evidence.

Note: Lack of capacity to sign a legal document could be related to factors other than age. But the proof would be similar, and would generally involve examining medical records and pulling in expert witnesses to explain them.

General Tips and Takeaways

When people who expect to receive property don’t ultimately receive it, they might claim the transfer was improper. By default, though, if a quitclaim or other deed is notarized, accepted, and filed in the county’s records, it’s legally valid. To invalidate a deed is a difficult process. That said, if you believe you are dealing with a case of undue influence and wish to challenge it, contact a law firm that handles wills and estates or elder matters. Agencies can offer helpful support as well. Look up “senior financial exploitation” and the name of your county and/or state.

A valid deed requires that the signer has sufficient capacity. No one should accept a deed from a homeowner who evidently doesn’t know how the signing will affect the ownership rights and interests of all involved.

Deed transfers need to be challenged quickly, because deeds can easily be transferred again and recorded by an unsuspecting new buyer. This further complicates the challenger’s task.

Important note: The material on this website is for readers’ general information. It is not intended as legal or financial advice. Undue influence is a complex issue. Case-specific legal advice requires signing a legal agreement with an attorney.