Wills, Trusts & Estates Prof Blog

Editor: Gerry W. Beyer
Texas Tech Univ. School of Law

Monday, July 20, 2020

Maryland Court of Appeals: Barclay v. Castruccio

In Barclay v. Castruccio from the September Term (2019), the Maryland Court of Appeals was tasked with deciding whether or not to recognize the tort of intentional interference with an inheritance or gift. 

Provided below is a brief summary of  holding: 

Darlene Barclay v. Sadie M. Castruccio, No. 30, September Term, 2019, Opinion by
Adkins, J.
 
TORTINTENTIONAL INTERFERENCE WITH AN INHERITANCE OR
GIFTCAUSE OF ACTION: Maryland recognizes as a cause of action the tort of
intentional interference with an inheritance or gift, and adopts the standards set forth in
Section 19 of the Restatement (Third) of Torts: Liability for Economic Harm.
 
TORTINTENTIONAL INTERFERENCE WITH AN INHERITANCE OR
GIFTTIMING OF INTERFERENCE: When one intentionally interferes with an
inheritance, one is interfering with the relationship between the testator and a potential
legatee. As such, the interference must occur before the end of the relationship, i.e., before
the testator’s death.
 
Special thanks to Matthew Bogin, (Esq., Bogin Law) for bringing this article to my attention.

https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/trusts_estates_prof/2020/07/maryland-supreme-court-barclay-v-castruccio.html

Estate Planning - Generally, New Cases | Permalink

Comments

Probably also bears noting that having recognized the cause of action the court here ruled that the plaintiff had not made sufficient allegations to survive a motion to dismiss.

Posted by: Russ Willis | Jul 20, 2020 2:12:54 PM

Post a comment