Nearly all business negotiations involve power differentials, which the parties often seek to use to their advantage to broker a better deal...
Nearly all business negotiations involve power differentials, which the parties often seek to use to their advantage to broker a better deal. However, there are situations where exerting power over the other party can rise to the level of undue influence or duress and potentially make the agreement unenforceable. The case law still cited in this regard includes decisions going back to the 19th Century.
Undue Influence
Undue influence is generally defined as mental, moral or physical exertion that destroys free agency and prevents a person from following his own will and instead, forces him to accept the domination and influence of another. If a party makes a contract or a will because of undue influence by another party, the contract or will is voidable and may not be enforced.
In order to prove a contractual defense or to defeat provisions of a will based on undue influence, the defendant or objectant must prove that a party’s influence prevented the defendant or testator from deciding, based on his or her own free will, to make the contract or will. To prevail, it must be proven that a party’s influence forced the signer to do something that would not otherwise have been done.
It is important to recognize that not every type of influence can be characterized as undue. Honest persuasion, advice, suggestion, affection, solicitation and even argument are not, of themselves, undue influence unless they prevent the other party from acting based on his/her own will.
Economic Duress
New Jersey and New York courts also recognize that an otherwise enforceable contract may be invalidated on the ground that it was entered into under “economic duress.” To prove that the contract was made under duress, the defendant must show that he or she was the victim of a wrongful or unlawful act or threat by the plaintiff which forced the defendant to do what he or she would not have done voluntarily. As the New Jersey Supreme Court described in Woodside Homes, Inc. v. Morristown, 26 N.J. 529, 544 (1958), “Before the doctrine of business compulsion can be invoked there must be an assent by one party to an improper or wrongful demand by another under circumstances in which the former has little choice but to accede to the demand, i.e., ‘to do what he otherwise would not have done.’”
It is important to note that the pressure exerted must be wrongful. As the court explained in Continental Bank v. Barclay Riding Academy, Inc., 93 N.J. 153 (1983), “Merely taking advantage of another’s financial difficulty is not duress. Rather, the person alleging financial difficulty must allege that it was contributed to or caused by the one accused of coercion.” In determining whether the act or threat forced the other party to do what he or she would not have done voluntarily, the court will look at the state of mind, age, and the relationship between the defendant and the person whom the defendant claims threatened the defendant. Courts will also consider other surrounding circumstances, such as did defendant have legal counsel; did defendant have time to reflect about the transaction; could the defendant have resisted the threat by getting relief from the courts; and did defendant resist such threats in the past?
New York Contract and Will Contest Factors
Undue influence is rarely proven by direct evidence and is usually proven by circumstantial evidence. Matter of Walther, 6 NY2d 49 [1959]; Rollwagen v Rollwagen, 63 NY 504 [1875]; Matter of Burke, 82 AD2d 260 [1981]
Among the factors that have been held to indicate the exercise of undue influence in a line of cases that includes decisions as far back as the 19th Century are:
the physical and mental condition of the defendant or testator;
whether an attorney who represented the defendant or testator was involved in the drafting of the contract or will;
whether the propounded contract or will deviates from the signer’s prior stated or demonstrated intent, dealings or testamentary pattern;
whether the person who allegedly wielded undue influence was in a position of trust or strength of position equivalent to coercion; and
whether the contract signer or testator was isolated from other resources and support or the objects of his or her natural affection.
With all this in mind, it is also important to remember that in order to defeat a motion for summary judgment, the objectant must demonstrate that there is a genuine triable issue by allegations which are specific and detailed, substantiated by evidence in the record and that mere conclusory assertions will not suffice.
Key Takeaway for Contracts
Parties may often have unequal bargaining power when negotiating a contract. While the law does not prevent a party from “driving a hard bargain,” the line between lawful and unlawful conduct is not always clear cut. To avoid crossing the line and risking the enforceability of your agreement, it is essential to always negotiate and act in good faith.
If you have questions, please contact us
If you have any questions or if you would like to discuss these issues further, please contact Dan Brecher or the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work, at 201-896-4100.
Does Your Homeowners Insurance Provide Adequate Coverage?
Your home is likely your greatest asset, which is why it is so important to adequately protect it. Homeowners insurance protects you from the financial costs of unforeseen losses, such as theft, fire, and natural disasters, by helping you rebuild and replace possessions that were lost While the definition of “adequate” coverage depends upon a […]
Understanding the Importance of a Non-Contingent Offer
Making a non-contingent offer can dramatically increase your chances of securing a real estate transaction, particularly in competitive markets like New York City. However, buyers should understand that waiving contingencies, including those related to financing, or appraisals, also comes with significant risks. Determining your best strategy requires careful analysis of the property, the market, and […]
Fred D. Zemel Appointed Chair of Strategic Planning at Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC
Business Transactional Attorney Zemel to Spearhead Strategic Initiatives for Continued Growth and Innovation Little Falls, NJ – February 21, 2025 – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC is pleased to announce that Partner Fred D. Zemel has been named Chair of the firm’s Strategic Planning Committee. In this role, Mr. Zemel will lead the committee in identifying, […]
Novation Agreement Process: Step-by-Step Guide for Businesses
Big changes sometimes occur during the life cycle of a contract. Cancelling a contract outright can be bad for your reputation and your bottom line. Businesses need to know how to best address a change in circumstances, while also protecting their legal rights. One option is to transfer the “benefits and the burdens” of a […]
What Is a Trade Secret? Key Elements and Legal Protections Explained
What is a trade secret and why you you protect them? Technology has made trade secret theft even easier and more prevalent. In fact, businesses lose billions of dollars every year due to trade secret theft committed by employees, competitors, and even foreign governments. But what is a trade secret? And how do you protect […]
What Is Title Insurance? Safeguarding Against Title Defects
If you are considering the purchase of a property, you may wonder — what is title insurance, do I need it, and why do I need it? Even seasoned property owners may question if the added expense and extra paperwork is really necessary, especially considering that people and entities insured by title insurance make fewer […]
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!
Explore What Matters Most to You.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
When Do Contract Negotiations Cross the Line?
Author: Dan Brecher
Nearly all business negotiations involve power differentials, which the parties often seek to use to their advantage to broker a better deal...
Nearly all business negotiations involve power differentials, which the parties often seek to use to their advantage to broker a better deal. However, there are situations where exerting power over the other party can rise to the level of undue influence or duress and potentially make the agreement unenforceable. The case law still cited in this regard includes decisions going back to the 19th Century.
Undue Influence
Undue influence is generally defined as mental, moral or physical exertion that destroys free agency and prevents a person from following his own will and instead, forces him to accept the domination and influence of another. If a party makes a contract or a will because of undue influence by another party, the contract or will is voidable and may not be enforced.
In order to prove a contractual defense or to defeat provisions of a will based on undue influence, the defendant or objectant must prove that a party’s influence prevented the defendant or testator from deciding, based on his or her own free will, to make the contract or will. To prevail, it must be proven that a party’s influence forced the signer to do something that would not otherwise have been done.
It is important to recognize that not every type of influence can be characterized as undue. Honest persuasion, advice, suggestion, affection, solicitation and even argument are not, of themselves, undue influence unless they prevent the other party from acting based on his/her own will.
Economic Duress
New Jersey and New York courts also recognize that an otherwise enforceable contract may be invalidated on the ground that it was entered into under “economic duress.” To prove that the contract was made under duress, the defendant must show that he or she was the victim of a wrongful or unlawful act or threat by the plaintiff which forced the defendant to do what he or she would not have done voluntarily. As the New Jersey Supreme Court described in Woodside Homes, Inc. v. Morristown, 26 N.J. 529, 544 (1958), “Before the doctrine of business compulsion can be invoked there must be an assent by one party to an improper or wrongful demand by another under circumstances in which the former has little choice but to accede to the demand, i.e., ‘to do what he otherwise would not have done.’”
It is important to note that the pressure exerted must be wrongful. As the court explained in Continental Bank v. Barclay Riding Academy, Inc., 93 N.J. 153 (1983), “Merely taking advantage of another’s financial difficulty is not duress. Rather, the person alleging financial difficulty must allege that it was contributed to or caused by the one accused of coercion.” In determining whether the act or threat forced the other party to do what he or she would not have done voluntarily, the court will look at the state of mind, age, and the relationship between the defendant and the person whom the defendant claims threatened the defendant. Courts will also consider other surrounding circumstances, such as did defendant have legal counsel; did defendant have time to reflect about the transaction; could the defendant have resisted the threat by getting relief from the courts; and did defendant resist such threats in the past?
New York Contract and Will Contest Factors
Undue influence is rarely proven by direct evidence and is usually proven by circumstantial evidence. Matter of Walther, 6 NY2d 49 [1959]; Rollwagen v Rollwagen, 63 NY 504 [1875]; Matter of Burke, 82 AD2d 260 [1981]
Among the factors that have been held to indicate the exercise of undue influence in a line of cases that includes decisions as far back as the 19th Century are:
the physical and mental condition of the defendant or testator;
whether an attorney who represented the defendant or testator was involved in the drafting of the contract or will;
whether the propounded contract or will deviates from the signer’s prior stated or demonstrated intent, dealings or testamentary pattern;
whether the person who allegedly wielded undue influence was in a position of trust or strength of position equivalent to coercion; and
whether the contract signer or testator was isolated from other resources and support or the objects of his or her natural affection.
With all this in mind, it is also important to remember that in order to defeat a motion for summary judgment, the objectant must demonstrate that there is a genuine triable issue by allegations which are specific and detailed, substantiated by evidence in the record and that mere conclusory assertions will not suffice.
Key Takeaway for Contracts
Parties may often have unequal bargaining power when negotiating a contract. While the law does not prevent a party from “driving a hard bargain,” the line between lawful and unlawful conduct is not always clear cut. To avoid crossing the line and risking the enforceability of your agreement, it is essential to always negotiate and act in good faith.
If you have questions, please contact us
If you have any questions or if you would like to discuss these issues further, please contact Dan Brecher or the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work, at 201-896-4100.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!
