Understanding Duress and Undue Influence in Contracts

For a contract to be enforceable, the parties must enter into it voluntarily. When one party's consent is obtained through improper pressure or manipulation, the contract may be voidable. Duress and undue influence are two related but distinct doctrines that protect parties whose free will has been compromised. Both topics appear on the CP exam and are essential knowledge for any paralegal working with contracts.

Duress Defined

Duress occurs when one party uses an improper threat to compel another party to enter into a contract. The threatened party must have had no reasonable alternative but to agree to the contract. If duress is established, the contract is voidable at the option of the coerced party, meaning that party can choose to either enforce the contract or rescind it.

Physical Duress

Physical duress involves threats of bodily harm or actual physical force. If someone signs a contract because they are threatened with violence, the contract is void (not merely voidable) because there was no genuine assent. Physical duress renders the contract void from the outset, as though it never existed. This is an extreme form of duress that, while uncommon in modern commercial transactions, still represents an important legal principle.

Economic Duress

Economic duress, also called business compulsion, occurs when one party uses economic pressure to force another into a contract. To establish economic duress, the plaintiff must typically show that the other party made an improper threat, the plaintiff had no reasonable alternative but to agree, and the threat actually induced the plaintiff to consent. Common examples include threatening to breach an existing contract unless the other party agrees to new, unfavorable terms, or withholding goods or payment to extract concessions.

What Constitutes an Improper Threat

Not every threat constitutes duress. The threat must be improper, meaning it involves conduct that is criminal, tortious, or a bad-faith breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing. A threat to exercise a legal right, such as filing a lawsuit or reporting criminal activity to authorities, is generally not considered improper unless it is used as leverage in a completely unrelated transaction. The line between hard bargaining and economic duress can be difficult to draw, and courts examine the totality of the circumstances.

Undue Influence Defined

Undue influence occurs when one party uses a position of trust, confidence, or authority to override another party's free will. Unlike duress, which involves overt threats, undue influence typically involves subtle manipulation that takes advantage of a relationship of dependency or trust.

Confidential Relationships

Undue influence claims most commonly arise in the context of confidential or fiduciary relationships. These include relationships between attorney and client, doctor and patient, guardian and ward, trustee and beneficiary, parent and child, and caregiver and elderly person. When a transaction benefits the dominant party in such a relationship, courts may presume undue influence and shift the burden to the dominant party to prove the transaction was fair and voluntary.

Elements of Undue Influence

To establish undue influence, the plaintiff generally must prove the existence of a relationship involving trust and confidence, that the dominant party used that relationship to influence the weaker party, that the resulting transaction was unfair or one-sided, and that the weaker party would not have entered the transaction but for the improper influence. Courts consider factors such as the vulnerability of the influenced party, the isolation of the influenced party from independent advice, the involvement of the dominant party in procuring the transaction, and the fairness of the resulting deal.

Distinguishing Duress from Undue Influence

While both doctrines involve the absence of voluntary consent, they differ in important ways. Duress typically involves explicit threats and can occur between strangers. Undue influence involves more subtle manipulation and typically requires a preexisting relationship of trust or dependency. Duress focuses on the nature of the threat, while undue influence focuses on the nature of the relationship and the abuse of the power imbalance within it.

Remedies

Both duress and undue influence make a contract voidable (except physical duress, which makes it void). The aggrieved party may seek rescission of the contract, which returns both parties to their pre-contract positions. In some cases, the aggrieved party may also seek damages for any losses suffered as a result of the improperly obtained agreement. The right to rescind can be waived if the aggrieved party, after the duress or influence ceases, ratifies the contract through continued performance or delay in seeking rescission.

Practical Considerations for Paralegals

When reviewing contracts or investigating potential claims, paralegals should look for red flags that suggest duress or undue influence. These include contracts signed under extreme time pressure, significant changes to existing agreements that benefit only one party, transactions between family members or caregivers and vulnerable individuals, the absence of independent legal counsel for the weaker party, and terms that are significantly more favorable to one side than marketplace norms would suggest.

Practice duress, undue influence, and other contract law topics with our CP exam flashcards. Explore our study plans for complete preparation across all CP exam domains.

Understanding Duress and Undue Influence in Contract Law