## Facts

- Richard Harmon sued his brother, Harold C. Harmon, and sister-in-law, Virginia S. Harmon, alleging they wrongfully interfered with his expected inheritance from their mother, Josephine F. Harmon.
- Josephine was about 87 years old and in ill health.
- Josephine had executed a 1976 will and made later statements indicating an intent that Richard receive at least a one-half interest in certain valuable property.
- Richard alleged the defendants used fraud and undue influence to induce Josephine to transfer valuable property to them during her lifetime.
- Richard alleged the transfer effectively disinherited him.
- Josephine was still alive when the complaint was filed.
- The Superior Court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim and for lack of standing.

## Issues

1. Whether an expectant legatee may maintain a tort action against third parties for wrongful interference with an intended legacy while the testator is still alive.
2. Whether allegations of fraud and undue influence inducing an inter vivos transfer that defeats an expected inheritance state a claim for tortious interference with an advantageous relationship and confer standing.

## Decision

- The Law Court sustained the appeal and reversed the dismissal.
- The court held the complaint stated a cognizable tort claim for wrongful interference with an expected inheritance.
- The court held the plaintiff had standing and a justiciable interest even though the testator was alive.
- The case was remanded for further proceedings.

## Legal Principles

- An expected inheritance may constitute a legally protectable expectancy for purposes of tortious interference with an advantageous relationship.
- A plaintiff is not required to wait until the testator’s death to sue when wrongful conduct (such as fraud or undue influence) is alleged to have already caused a concrete loss by altering the disposition of property.
- On a motion to dismiss, the court accepts as true all well-pleaded material allegations; if those allegations describe wrongful conduct, a resulting transfer, and loss of the expectancy, the pleading can state a claim and establish standing.
- The contingent nature of an expectancy does not bar the cause of action; uncertainty primarily affects proof and the measure of damages rather than the existence of a claim.

## Conclusion

The court recognized that intentional wrongdoing that disrupts an expected inheritance can be actionable in tort and permitted an expectant legatee to proceed with a pre-death interference claim when the complaint alleges fraud or undue influence causing an inter vivos transfer that defeats the expectancy.


Harmon v. Harmon, 404 A.2d 1020 (Me. 1979)