Haynes v. First Nat'l State Bk. of NJ

I am in full accord with the majority’s meticulous treatment of the “undue influence” issue, but I part company on its decision concerning the in terrorem clauses.

On April 24, 1975, when Mrs. Dutrow added the challenged clauses to the testamentary instruments, enforcement of in terrorem clauses was perfectly in keeping with the public policy *190of this state, as it was at the time of the testator’s death in 1977. As the Court acknowledges, ante at 187, that policy was to give effect to such clauses where, as here, the instrument was contested on the ground of undue influence. See Alper v. Alper,…