Legal Translation Services for Foreign Will Contest and Dispute Cases
Rhode Island Supreme Court Declines to Apply Greek Law in Cross-Border Will Dispute
Certified legal document translation services and services of forensic genealogy experts are often used in foreign will contest and dispute cases. In the era of increasing globalization, estate planning and administration frequently involve cross-border elements. As families, assets, and relationships stretch across jurisdictions and as various foreign intestacy laws and intestate succession laws come into play, courts are increasingly called upon to decide which country’s laws apply to estate disputes. The Rhode Island Supreme Court’s decision in Smile of the Child v. Estate of Papadopouli, 272 A.3d 99 (R.I. 2022) is an example of how U.S. courts conduct a choice-of-law analysis when foreign legal rules clash with local statutes and policies. The case also underscores the powerful pull of local public policy in probate proceedings.
Below we discuss the Rhode Island Supreme Court’s decision to apply Rhode Island law over Greek law in a dispute involving the administration of an estate with ties to both jurisdictions. The court’s opinion serves as a valuable guide to understanding the limits of foreign law in U.S. probate disputes and provides a useful roadmap for attorneys navigating transnational estate matters.
A Cross-Border Legal Battle Emerges
The decedent, Matoula Papadopouli, held dual citizenship in the United States and Greece. She also owned property in both countries. Upon her death in 2015, the decedent’s cousin, Cynthia Kendall, was appointed administratrix of the estate in Rhode Island. Meanwhile, in Greece, a Greek child welfare organization, Smile of the Child, presented a holographic will allegedly drafted by Papadopouli in 2013, naming it as the sole beneficiary. The administratrix challenged the will’s validity in Greek courts, claiming it was fraudulent.
The administratrix initiated probate proceedings in Rhode Island while the Greek charity sought to probate the 2013 holographic will. The administratrix used estate funds to challenge the validity of the holographic will. Specifically, the administratrix filed a lawsuit in Greece requesting that the Greek will be declared void because it was not written by the decedent herself. The administratrix then sought reimbursement in Rhode Island probate court.
The charity objected, arguing that under Greek law, estate funds could not be used to finance litigation over the validity of a will. Greek law requires parties to pay their own legal costs in such proceedings. The charity argued that Greek law should govern and prohibit reimbursement. The dispute ultimately landed before the Rhode Island Supreme Court.
Should Rhode Island Law or Greek Law Govern the Use of Estate Funds to Defend the Estate against a Will Contest in Greece?
At the heart of the case was a narrow but consequential issue: could the administratrix use estate funds to pay for legal fees incurred while defending the estate against a will contest in Greece? Or, more precisely, should Rhode Island law or Greek law govern the question?
Under Rhode Island General Laws § 33-22-26, administrators are entitled to reimbursement for reasonable legal expenses incurred in the good faith administration of the estate. Greek law, by contrast, bars reimbursement from estate funds for litigation costs incurred in will contests, adhering instead to a “loser pays” principle where each party bears its own costs unless otherwise ordered by the court. This presented a classic “true conflict” situation in which the laws of the competing jurisdictions produced materially different outcomes.
Choice-of-Law Analysis: Rhode Island’s Interest-Weighing Approach
Rhode Island follows the interest-weighing approach to conflict-of-law analysis, looking at which jurisdiction has the most significant relationship to the issue in dispute. The Court considered several factors, including:
1. Predictability of Results: Because the probate proceedings were initiated in Rhode Island and some estate assets were located there, the Court found this factor favored applying Rhode Island law.
2. Maintenance of International Order: The Court disagreed with the trial court’s conclusion about international order, finding that this factor actually supports applying Greek law. Since the estate funds were used to litigate a will dispute in Greece—where such use is not permitted—and Greece has a strong interest in the outcome, the Court concluded that international order favors applying the law of the country where the litigation is occurring.
3. Simplification of the Judicial Task: The Court acknowledged that applying Greek law would simplify the matter by disallowing reimbursement altogether.
4. Advancement of the Forum’s Governmental Interests: The Court heavily emphasized Rhode Island’s strong policy in empowering administrators to defend estates against potentially fraudulent claims. The Court explained that Rhode Island law was crafted to ensure that administrators can use estate funds to act in the estate’s best interest. The Court found Greek law would undermine that policy by requiring administrators to act without financial support from the estate.
5. Application of the Better Rule of Law: The Court found Rhode Island law to be the “better rule,” highlighting its emphasis on fairness and fiduciary responsibility.
In Smile of the Child v. Estate of Papadopouli, the Rhode Island Supreme Court Rejected the Application of Greek Law in a Cross-Border Will Dispute, Holding Rhode Island Law Governed the Use of Estate Funds to Defend Foreign Litigation Due to its Stronger Public Policy Interest in Protecting Administrators and Preserving the Integrity of the Estate Administration Process
A central theme in the Court’s opinion was the importance of Rhode Island’s public policy. The Court repeatedly emphasized that Rhode Island law allows administrators to use estate assets to protect estates from spurious claims and to fulfill their fiduciary duties. The Court found that applying Greek law would essentially force administrators to act at their own financial risk, discouraging them from defending valid wills and threatening the integrity of estate administration.
In short, applying Greek law would frustrate Rhode Island’s legislative goals. The Court was not willing to subjugate local policy interests to those of a foreign jurisdiction, even in a case with transnational elements.
The Court’s Holding
Ultimately, the Rhode Island Supreme Court upheld the probate court’s decision to allow the administratrix to use estate funds to reimburse herself for legal fees incurred in defending the will contest in Greece. The Court concluded that Rhode Island law applied to the reimbursement issue, even though the underlying litigation was pending in Greek court. The Court explicitly stated: “[a]lthough the litigation at issue is taking place in a foreign country, nothing in § 33-22-26 limits reimbursement only to those expenses incurred in defending domestic litigation.”
Why Greek Law Was Rejected
Greek law was rejected not because it lacked relevance, but because it conflicted with Rhode Island’s core probate principles. While the Court acknowledged Greece’s connection to the decedent and to the will contest, it found that Rhode Island had a stronger interest in determining how estates are managed within its borders.
Importantly, the Rhode Island statute governing reimbursement does not contain any language restricting its scope to litigation occurring within the United States. Had the legislature intended to impose such a limitation, it could have done so. The absence of any such limitation signaled to the Court that the statute applied even when the administrator defends the estate abroad.
Implications for Cross-Border Estate Litigation
This case offers several important lessons for attorneys and families navigating international estate matters:
1. Forum Matters: Where the estate is probated can significantly influence which law governs key issues. In this case, Rhode Island’s forum status played a crucial role in the outcome.
2. Administrators Are Protected: In jurisdictions like Rhode Island, estate administrators are given strong legal tools and financial protections to carry out their fiduciary responsibilities.
3. Foreign Law Is Not Always Controlling: Even in cases where foreign law has a clear connection to the dispute, U.S. courts may reject its application if it conflicts with local public policy or statutory frameworks.
4. Planning Is Critical: Dual nationals and individuals with assets in multiple countries should anticipate potential conflicts and draft estate plans accordingly. For example, specifying choice-of-law clauses where permitted can help reduce uncertainty.
5. Legal Fees and Reimbursement Rights Vary Widely: Countries take different approaches to reimbursement of legal fees in probate and estate litigation. Understanding those differences is essential for administrators and counsel.
The Rhode Island Supreme Court’s decision in Smile of the Child v. Estate of Papadopouli highlights the importance of local law and public policy in estate administration, even in disputes that span international boundaries. While Greek law arguably had a stronger connection to the underlying will contest, the Court refused to apply it because doing so would undermine Rhode Island’s legislative purpose and public policy.
By choosing Rhode Island law over Greek law, the Court affirmed that estate administrators must be empowered to defend estates without incurring personal financial risk—a principle that lies at the heart of American probate law. The case stands as a cautionary tale for practitioners and international families alike: the laws of the forum state will often govern key issues, especially when those laws embody strong public policy preferences.
As cross-border estate litigation becomes more common, this case provides a helpful precedent for courts and counsel grappling with the intersection of domestic and foreign probate law. It reminds us that while global assets and family ties may complicate the factual landscape, local law and local policy will still carry decisive weight in many U.S. probate courts.
Contact international genealogy research and certified legal translation service All Language Alliance, Inc. to obtain certified English translation of Apostille Greek documents and to retain a Greek deposition interpreter for an international probate matter.
#alllanguagealliance #legaltranslationservices #certifiedtranslationservices #Greektranslation #Greecelaw #Greeklegaltranslation #foreignwilltranslation #foreignwillcontest #foreignwill