Final Flashcards
3 cases regarding the freedom of disposition exception
- Shapira v Union Nat’l Bank – marrying a Jewish girl by time your 28 or, if not, to the state of Israel does not contravene public policy because it is observing a religious purpose (hence Israel)
- But see Maddox v Maddox – marry into this religion that only has 5 or 6 members when she gets to marrying age, unreasonable restraint on the family
- Dominant Purpose Partial or Total Restraint on Marriage / Encouragement of Divorce – if limits marriage, is a restraint. But see not a dominant purpose if trust/will is meant to support until the marriage
Is freedom of disposition constitutional?
iv. This is not constitutionally protected according to the Fifth Amendment takings clause – See Irving Trust v Day (1942); But see Hodel v Irving – total taking of at death transfer was unconstitutional under the Fifth Amendment. Thus some dead hand transfer is constitutionally protected
What happens to posthumously acquired property
i. Property not owned upon death cannot be devised
ii. Thus property acquired by me posthumously by “If Tyler dies then to Tyler’s estate” clauses cannot be passed through my already executed will if I have died when land is bequeathed. It is passed to whoever is my intestate heir at law.
4 examples of non probate property
a. Nonprobate Property
i. Inter vivos Trust – Passes through terms of trust, not probate
ii. Pay-on-death/Transfer-on-death Contracts
iii. Life insurance
iv. Joint tenancy
3 examples of probate property
b. Probate Property
i. Testamentary Trusts
ii. Will
iii. Intestacy
Formal vs Informal Probate
i. Formal Probate UPC § 3-401
1. Representative petitions court
2. Judicial determination occurs after notice given to parties
3. Proceedings become judgements if not appealed
ii. Informal Probate UPC § 3-301
1. Representative petitions court
2. Will validity and intestacy not at issue unless objection occurs
Are negative wills in the UPC
Yes
i. 101(a) Any part of a non-devised estate passes through intestacy
ii. 101(b) Allows for negative wills
How do CL, most wills OR the UPC treat simultaneous death
i. At CL needed to be a millisecond by the preponderance of the evidence
ii. Under the UPC § 2-104, must survive for 120 hours by clear and convincing evidence
iii. In wills, commonly there is boiler plate language of multiples of days
Define per stirpes (1/3 states)
split at first generation and then distribute down at necessary – note this is regardless of whether first generation is alive or not – creates vertical equality
Define modified per stirpes
split at the nth generation, where n = the generation where at least one descendent is alive – then distribute down as in per stirpes
Define per capita at each generation
split at the nth generation, where n = the generation where at least one descendent is alive – then recombine shares and distribute equally along n+1th generation, continue process
When do ancestors potentially get anything via intestacy? And how much would the spouse take?
If there are no surviving issue and just parents – parents take. If spouse plus parents? 1/2 states say spouse only, other authority says spouse/parents split.
What are the options if there are no parents AND no issue
Parentelic (go up then down) OR Degree-of-relationship system (table of consanguinity)
How are step-children treated?
The key question is whether a parent-child relationship exists
How could adoption change taking under UPC
Under UPC a parent-child still exists even if there is adoption but in Hall v Vallidingham adoption severs the original parent’s ties
How is double-taking treated if you, say, married your cousin
Under UPC you can get the larger share, some states (Mississippi LOL allow you to take both sides)
How do you prove a gift was an advancement under CL and UPC
Under CL any gift during life was presumed an advancement, under UPC this is reversed. Under UPC you can rebut presumption with a contemporaneous writing by either child OR parent
Example hotchpot question
Estate = 20,000
A –> B - $5000 during life
B C and D survive A
now do if A–> $20,000
Should get $6,666 apiece – 25,000 is total – all get 8,300 - A gets 3300
A gets nothing and B and C get $10,000 apiece – note NO CLAWBACKS
Four types of children supervision systems
a. Guardianship (of property) – slow and expensive, a lot of court actions
b. Conservatorship – like a trust, more flexible – one annual trip to courthouse – gets $ at 18
c. Custodianship – similar to conservatorship – gets $ at 18
d. Trusteeship – even more flexible
Bars to taking
Disclaimer, slayer rule (in the UPC)
When can/cant you disclaim?
CAN disclaim: to avoid creditors
CANT disclaim: the gov’t = taxes/medicaid OR “strategically” - your issue can’t take more when you disclaim
What does a will require
A writing
Two attesting witnesses
Signature
How are the words after the signature on a will treated
As if they do not count - check with TB
What is strict compliance
A writing, two attesting witnesses in the presence of the testator AND each other (1/2 the states)
What is UPC 2-502
A writing, signed in the presence or acknowledged in presence of two witnesses, signed by two attesting witnesses “w/in reasonable time” - not contemporaneous - (slim majority of states)
ALSO there is a notary that would be accepted too but NOT ADOPTED by majority of states
Four formalities
Channeling fxn
Evidentiary fxn
Cautionary/rituallary fxn
Protective fxn
Cases about strict compliance
Groffman case/Casdorph case (bank teller)
What after the softening doctrines invented by courts
line-of-sight and conscience presence test
How does UPC v CL treat interested witnesses
Under CL - interested witnesses get nothing, now many states allow them to get as much as they would in intestacy (still harsh) - the reduced purging statutes,
LAST - under UPC there are no interested witnesses
What does the harmless error rule apply to?
Wills, revocations, codicils, revivals
What is the harmless error rule?
Can cure defects iin wills revocations codicils and revivals if decendent intended the document to be his/her will by clear and convincing evidence
Case where harmless error was used
In re Horton - crazy mom drove son who had a conservator to suicide - court allowed HER
You have a switched wills problem, what is the analysis?
Strict compliance - no accepted like in Pavlinkos estate
Substantial compliance rule - older rule that required C&C evidence that the wills act formalities were followed
Harmless error rule
How should you discuss “intent” on the test?
The three intents - the intent to
(1) create a scheme to dispose of your property
(2) to comply with the wills act formalities
(3) to “make a will”
Was the will a draft?
Like in Macool case - maybe? Would vitiate the intent. Fact specific inquiry.