In analyzing undue influence, which statement best describes the relevance of a prior will that favors a different beneficiary?

• A. It can support an undue influence claim by showing a change in beneficiaries
• B. It has no bearing on undue influence
• C. It proves the testator had no capacity
• D. It proves the prior will was invalid

Answer: (A)

The main idea is that a prior will showing a different beneficiary can support an undue influence claim because it highlights a significant change in who was favored, which may indicate someone exerted improper pressure to alter the testator’s plans. Having a prior will provides a baseline of the testator’s previous wishes, so a shift in beneficiaries can raise a strong inference that influence—especially from someone with motive or access—affected the disposition. This evidence does not by itself prove lack of capacity, which is about the testator’s mental ability at the time of making the will, nor does it automatically render the prior will invalid, which would require separate grounds. Thus, the prior will’s differing beneficiary is relevant because it can support an undue influence claim by showing a change in beneficiaries.