noncontest clause
Noncontest clauses (also known as in terrorem clauses , contest clauses, no-contest clauses , anti-contest clauses , and forfeiture clauses) are clauses in a will that impose a condition upon a devisee or legatee that they will not dispute the provisions of a will. If a beneficiary violates such a clause, their interest or inheritance may be revoked. These clauses prevent challenges to a will and keep the will out of a long probate .
Most states enforce these clauses, but they are often disfavored and subject to strict construction . Many states limit the enforceability of these clauses to ensure that beneficiaries can challenge conduct against public policy , such as fraudulent conduct. In some states, like Florida , such clauses are unenforceable by statute.
For example, New York courts have held that in terrorem clauses that attempt to preclude a beneficiary from questioning the eligibility or conduct of a fiduciary will not be enforced because such clauses are assumed to go against the intentions of the testator , and holding otherwise goes against public policy (See In re Estate of Prevratil ).
Some jurisdictions maintain a probable cause exception to such clauses. For example, California courts have held that they may decline to enforce in terrorem clauses where "the beneficiary challenging the will acted in good faith and had probable cause for the challenge" (see Estate of Gonzalez ). Under this exception, "probable cause" is defined as the “existence . . . of evidence which would lead a reasonable person . . . to conclude that there is a substantial likelihood that the contest or attack will be successful." The probable cause exception is used to protect legitimate challenges to wills, and probable cause can be found in evidence indicating that a will may be legally invalid, such as undue influence on the testator or forgery .
Jurisdictions without a probable cause exception may recognize other exceptions. For example, Georgia courts have held that in terrorem clauses are void unless the will contains directions to how property will be allocated if the clause is violated (See Duncan v. Rawls ).
In deciding the enforceability of in terrorem clauses, courts will interpret the will as a whole to ascertain the intent of the testator. As a result, a challenge to a will, even in the face of an in terrorem clause, will succeed if the challenge is consistent with the intent of the testator in drafting their will.
[Last reviewed in June of 2025 by the Wex Definitions Team ]
Wex