In LeMaster v. Hynds, Yohnka, Bzdill & McInerney, LLC, plaintiffs Peggy LeMaster and Kathleen Martinez sued attorney John W. Hynds and his law firm for legal malpractice after the drafting of a 2018 will for their brother, Mark Coffman, who was gravely ill. The plaintiffs alleged the will resulted from undue influence by Mark’s wife, Dorothy, and attorney negligence in protecting Mark’s true testamentary intent. The 2018 will materially altered prior estate arrangements by granting Dorothy increased discretion over key assets. After the plaintiffs contested the will in both the probate and appellate courts, the Illinois Supreme Court ultimately found that no undue influence had occurred and that Mark’s wishes were reflected in the new will. In a subsequent malpractice action, the circuit court granted summary judgment for defendants, concluding that plaintiffs could not prove damages because the will accurately reflected Mark’s intent and the appellate court affirmed.
Legal malpractice requires plaintiffs to prove both a breach of duty and that such breach proximately caused the plaintiffs’ actual damages. In the context of legal malpractice for drafting a will, the LeMaster Court defined “actual damages” to mean a will that does not effectuate the testator’s true intent. The participation of a beneficiary or fiduciary, and the existence of “red flags” alone may not establish a breach causing damages unless plaintiffs can show that improper attorney conduct resulted in a will that failed to express the client’s real intentions.
In terms of professional best practices, attorneys should document mental capacity, inquire privately with the client about their wishes, assess and manage undue influence risks, and avoid or explicitly address conflicts of interest, especially when a person likely to become a beneficiary arranges or participates in the estate planning engagement. However, the absence of some protective steps will not necessarily create malpractice liability, because if the testator’s genuine wishes and intent are proven to be consistent with the attorney’s work product then there are no actual damages.
To avoid professional liability claims in will drafting and estate planning scenarios, attorneys should exercise heightened diligence by taking extra steps to safeguard the client’s wishes and independence, particularly when there is a high risk of undue influence or even the potential perception of undue influence. However, regardless of the process undertaken to execute the will, liability for professional malpractice only attaches if it is established that attorney mistakes resulted in a will that did not effectuate the testator’s true intent.
