Wills Flashcards

1
Q

What explains how property is divided if a person dies without a will (or if the will is invalidated in part or in whole or does not make a total disposition)?

A

Intestate Succession

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

If the decedent’s spouse and parents do not survive the testator, what are the two available schemes to divide property among the decedent’s children?

A

Per capita at each generation: all cousins treated alike—find generation where there are issue living; give one share for each living issue and one share for each person in that generation who is dead but has issue surviving; combine the shares belonging to the dead people and distribute them equally at the next generational level.

Per capita with representation (per stirpes): child takes parent’s share. Same as above except instead of combining and dividing equally, simply pass each deceased person’s share on to her issues.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Decedent dies without a will but gave a child a gift during her lifetime. Should the gift be deducted from what the child would inherit under the laws of intestate succession? (Advancements)

A

CL: lifetime transfer to an heir was treated as a down payment on the heir’s intestate share and was taken into account when computing the heir’s intestate share.

Majority: lifetime transfer is presumed to be a gift and is ignored in computing the heir’s intestate share unless evidence shows the decedent intended it to be an advancement.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Decedent dies with a will but gave a child a gift during her lifetime. Should the gift be deducted from what the child would inherit under the laws of intestate succession?

A

(Ademption by satisfaction)

A lifetime gift is not a prepayment unless: (1) the will says so, (2) testator declares in a contemporaneous writing that the gift is to be deducted from the will, or (3) the devisee acknowledges in writing that the gift is satisfaction of the bequest.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

General rule to execute a valid will

A

In writing, signed by the testator, and witnessed by two witnesses.

Also that the testator is 18+ and intended that the document is his will.

Note: generally, any mark made with intent to adopt the will counts as a signature.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Holographic wills.

A

Unwitnessed wills.

Majority: Valid if signed and in the testator’s handwriting.

Some states say holographic wills are not allowed.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

UPC Dispensing Power

A

A court can validate a will so long as there is clear and convincing evidence that the decedent intended the document to be her will.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Incorporation by reference

A

A writing that is not valid as a will may be incorporated by reference into a will if the will manifests an (1) intent to incorporate the writing and the writing is (2) identified with reasonable certainty. This writing must exist at (3) the time the will is executed.

UPC: testator can dispose of tangible personal property by a signed memorandum.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Revocation of a will by physical act—execution of a new will or cancellation/other writings on the will.

A

Must be done with the intent to revoke the will. Testator or someone acting at the testator’s direction and in his “conscious presence” may revoke the will.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Dependent relative revocation.

A

Under this doctrine, a first will isn’t revoked if a later will is found invalid.

If a testator revokes a will/bequest based on a mistaken assumption of law/fact, the revocation of the will is ineffective if it appears that the testator wouldn’t have revoked the bequest had the testator had accurate information.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Divorce—revocation of a will.

A

Revokes gifts in favor of a spouse.

There actually needs to be a divorce/annulment, not just a filing of divorce.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

When a gift fails because the beneficiary is not alive:

A

If a beneficiary does not survive the testator, the gift will LAPSE or fail and fall into the residuary.

Anti-lapse statutes: if a beneficiary dies before the testator and was both related by blood to the testator within a certain degree of relationship and had issue who survived, the gift to the deceased beneficiary is saved and the beneficiary’s issue will take in lieu of the beneficiary.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Slayer Statute.

A

An individual who feloniously and intentionally kills the decedent, or who is convicted of committing abuse, neglect, or exploitation with respect to the decedent, forfeits all benefits with respect to the decedent’s estate.

Voluntary manslaughter is a form of a felonious and intentional killing.

If a beneficiary accidentally kills the decedent, the slayer rule does not bar a gift, nor does it bar a gift if the slayer murdered someone other than the decedent.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

When a gift fails because the property no longer exists.

A

If specifically devised property is not in the testator’s estate when the testator dies, the bequest adeems—the gift fails.

Under many statutes, if the testator replaced the property, or if there were insurance proceeds unpaid at death, then the beneficiary would receive that in place of the property.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Disclaimers.

A

Disclaimed property (property that a beneficiary does not want) will pass as if the person disclaiming had failed to survive the testator. An anti-lapse statute may apply; otherwise the gift will fall into the residuary.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Abatement

A

When the assets of an estate are insufficient to satisfy all the gifts made by someone’s will, then the gifts to the beneficiaries will be reduced (abated) in the following order: intestate property, residuary gifts, general gifts, and specific gifts.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Mental capacity to execute a will

A

A testator must have capacity to execute a will.

The burden of proving the testator lacks mental capacity rests on the contestant. A testator meets this requirement if the testator knows (1) the nature and extent of his property, (2) the persons who are the natural objects of the testator’s bounty, (3) the nature of the instrument that the testator is signing, and (4) the disposition that is being made in the will.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Undue influence.

A

Present when the wrongdoer exerts such influence over the testator that it overcomes the testator’s free will and causes the testator to make a gift he would otherwise not have made.

The burden of establishing undue influence generally is on the will contestant who must show: (1) the testator was Susceptible to undue influence, (2) the alleged influencer had the Opportunity to exert undue influence (3) the alleged influencer had a Disposition to exert undue influence and (4) the will Appears to be a product of undue influence. (SODA)

Most courts only invalidate portions that are infected by undue influence.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

What if a portion of the will follows the testator’s signature?

A

If the clause is present at the time the will is executed: some states say anything below the signature is bad; most states say the will, including the clause, is valid.

If the clause is added after execution: will is still valid, but the addition is not.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Presence Requirement for Witnesses

A

Scope of Vision Test (minority): T and witnesses are in each other’s presence only if they could see each other sign were they to look.

Conscious Presence Test (majority): T and witnesses are in each other’s presence if they are conscious of where each other is and what each other is doing.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Interested Witnesses

A

Majority Rule: interested witness situation does not result in denial of probate of will, but beneficiary-witness loses legacy unless: there were two disinterested attesting witnesses or witness-beneficiary would be an heir if there were no will (she takes lesser of given amount in will or intestate share).

UPC and modern trend: a will is not invalid because the will is signed by an interested witness.

Note: frequently raises undue influence issue.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

In most states, cancellations must:

A

Touch the language of the will.

“VOID” on the back of the will is insufficient revocation by physical act.

In the UPC: this will cancel the will.

Note: must be on the will itself, not a copy.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

What is the presumption if the will is in T’s possession from time of execution until death and found in mutilated condition after T’s death?

A

T did mutilating with intent to revoke.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

What is the presumption if the will was last seen in T’s possession and control not found after T’s death?

A

Reason it can’t be found is that T destroyed with intent to revoke.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

Revocation of a will by another person must be:

A

(1) at T’s direction and (2) in T’s conscious presence.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

Where codicil makes no reference to will but contains slightly inconsistent provisions, to the extent possible the will and codicil are _____. But to the extent of any inconsistent provisions, ______.

A

Read together

The later document controls and thereby revokes by inconsistency the prior will.

Note: the same rule can apply when there are two wills and the second does not in terms revoke the first. If the second has no residuary clause, it is presumptively a codicil to the first. There is an implied revocation only for inconsistencies. If the second has a residuary clause it presumptively revokes the first in its entirety.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

Revocation of a will revokes ____. Revocation of a codicil to a will ____.

A

All codicils thereto.

Does not revoke the will.

28
Q

T’s typewritten will made a bequest of “$10,000 to my friend X.” Subsequent to the will’s execution, T drew a line through the $10,000 and wrote in above it $15,000. T signed his name in the margin.

Has the $10,000 bequest been revoked?
Can the interlineation ($15,000) be given effect?
Should Dependent Relative Revocation be applied?

A

The $10,000 bequest has been cancelled.

The $15,000 interlineation cannot be given effect unless (1) the will is re-executed or (2) the will is republished by codicil.

DRR allows us to disregard a revocation based on a mistake of law/fact if the court believes that, but for the mistake, T would not have made the revocation.

29
Q

When beneficiary named in the will dies before the testator:

A

The gift lapses UNLESS it is saved by the anti-lapse statute.

Note: antilapse statute says beneficiary’s issue, not who they put in their will.

30
Q

Class gift rule (“children”)

A

When there is a gift by will to a group of persons generically described as a class and some class member predeceases the testator and the lapse statute does not apply(to a friend), the surviving class members take.

31
Q

Lapse in residuary estate

A

If the residuary estate is devised to two or more persons and the gift to one of them fails for any reason, the surviving residuary devises take the entire residuary estate in proportion to their interests in the residue.

32
Q

UPC rule for ademption in a will executed before T declared incompetent

A

If specifically devised property is sold by the conservator, or if condemnation award or insurance proceeds relating to the property are paid to the conservator, the specific devisee has a right to a general legacy equal to the net sale price, condemnation award, or insurance proceeds unless testator’s disability has been adjudicated to have ceased and testator survives the adjudication by one year.

33
Q

Under the UPC, rather than finding ademption, a specific devisee has the right to the remaining specifically devised property and:

A
  • Any balance of purchase price owing from purchaser when contract is still executors at T’s death (equitable conversion doctrine).
  • Any amount of condemnation award for taking of the property, to the extent unpaid at T’s death.
  • Any amount of fire or casualty insurance proceeds unpaid at death.
  • Any real or tangible personal property acquired as a replacement for other similar property.
  • Property acquired as a result of a foreclosure of a security interest on specifically devised note.
34
Q

Stock splits vs. stock dividends

A

Common law: devisee gets all shares if it is a stock split; only gets specific shares if it was a stock dividend.

UPC: devisee gets all shares. A specific devisee takes any additional or other securities of the same entity owned by the testator because of action initiated by the entity, excluding any acquired by exercise of purchase options.

35
Q

If a company is acquired by another and the latter gives shares of stock in the new company for shares of stock in the original:

A

Common law: specific devisee for original company’s stock is adeemed.

UPC: specific devisee is entitled to securities of another entity owned by the testator as a result of merger, consolidation, reorganization, or other similar action initiated by the entity.

36
Q

“I bequeath MY 100 shares of Coronado stock to A; I bequeath 200 shares of Baker stock to B.” Thereafter, T sells all of her Coronado and Baker stock.

A

A’s gift is specific, so A is adeemed.

B’s gift is not specific. Executor will buy shares to fund the gift.

37
Q

“I give $5,000 to my nephew, John Paul Jones.” At the time T executed the will he had two nephews whose names were James Peter Jones and Paul Frederick Jones. T had never met either nephew, and no nephew named John Paul Jones ever existed. Who takes the $5,000?

A

This is a latent ambiguity. Extrinsic evidence is admissible to clear up a latent ambiguity. Gift fails if evidence doesn’t exist.

38
Q

T had a nephew named John Paul Jones who he hadn’t seen for ten years. After T’s death, Paul Frederick Jones says “There’s been a mistake! T told me on numerous occasions that he intended to, and that he had, left a legacy for me in the will.” The typist says “I goofed. I have the notes T gave me, from which I typed the will, and they show clearly that the legacy was supposed to have been given to Paul Frederick Jones, not John Paul Jones as it says in the will.” Is this evidence admissible?

A

Most states: No. Plain meaning rule: can’t disturb plain meaning of will with extrinsic evidence.

UPC: Yes. May reform the terms of a will, even if unambiguous, to conform the terms to the testator’s intent if it is proved by clear and convincing evidence that both the accomplishment of the testator’s intent and the terms of the will were affected by mistake of fact/law.

39
Q

Intestacy Rules for Decedent Survived by Spouse

A
  1. If survived by spouse but not by issue or parent ENTIRE ESTATE
  2. If survived by spouse and issue all of whom are also issue of spouse ENTIRE ESTATE
  3. If survived by spouse and issue at least one of whom is not issue of spouse, the spouse is commonly given a fixed amount off the top and a fraction of any excess. For example, under the UPC, the spouse takes the first $100,000 and 1/2 of any excess.
40
Q

Intestacy Rules for Share not Going to Spouse (or all of estate if no spouse)

A
  1. All to issue, if any
  2. If no issue, to parents or survivor
  3. If no issue or parents, to parents’ issue
41
Q

Majority rule for intestacy—dividing among issue.

A

Issue take per capita (equally) if all are of same degree of relationship; otherwise they take by representation.

42
Q

What is the probate estate?

A

The estate that could have been controlled by a will had T executed one. Does not include life insurance, property held in trust, right of survivorship property, securities/bank accounts registered in payable on death or transfer on death or property T did not own at death.

43
Q

What happens if a testator’s residuary estate is bequeathed to two or more beneficiaries and one of the beneficiaries’ shares lapses?

A

CL: that share does not pass to the remaining beneficiaries, but instead “falls out of the will” and passes by intestacy.

Most states have replaced this rule by statute, under which the lapsed share passes to the other residuary beneficiaries in proportion to their interests in the residue.

44
Q

When does a presumption of undue influence arise?

A

When (1) there is a confidential relationship between the testator and the beneficiary-influencer, (2) the beneficiary participated in procuring or drafting of the will, and (3) the provisions of the will appear to be unnatural and favor the person who allegedly

45
Q

Contesting testamentary capacity:

A

Burden of proof on the contestants.

(1) did T understand the nature of the act he was doing?
(2) did T know the nature and character of his property?
(3) did T know the natural objects of his bounty?
(4) did T understand the disposition he wished to make?

46
Q

Contesting a will due to undue influence

A

Burden of proof is on contestants.

(1) existence and exertion of the influence
(2) effect is to overpower the mind and will of the testator
(3) result is a will that would not have been executed but for the influence.

47
Q

Intestate succession: property divided in the absence of a will goes to…

A

Spouse; parents; children; then either: per stirpes (per capita by representation) or per capita by generation.

48
Q

Majority rule for advancements

A

Lifetime transfer is presumed to be a gift and is ignored in computing the heir’s interstate share unless evidence otherwise indicates.

49
Q

Ademption by satisfaction

A

(There is a will)

The doctrine of ademption by satisfaction provides for the situation in which a testator decides to change the timing of a gift in order to permit the beneficiary to enjoy the benefits of the gift before the testator’s death. If a pecuniary gift is given before the death of the testator, the same devise in the testator’s will is considered already fulfilled and is not given after his death.

UPC: lifetime gift is not a prepayment unless: (1) the will says so; (2) the testator declares in a contemporaneous writing; or (3) devisee acknowledges in a writing.

50
Q

Valid will requires:

A

In writing, signed by testator, witnessed by two witnesses

Testator is 18+ and intended the document to be his will.

51
Q

Holographic will

A

Unwitnessed will

To be valid, must be signed and all material portions in the testator’s handwriting (1/2 states recognize this)

52
Q

Incorporation by reference

A

A writing not valid as a will can be incorporated when the will manifests an intent to incorporate the writing and the writing is identified with reasonable certainty and exists at the time the will is executed.

53
Q

Revocation of a will

A

By physical act: action and intent to revoke the will

54
Q

Dependent Relative Revocation

A

A previous will is not revoked if a later will is found invalid.

Especially used if a testator revokes a will or bequest based on a mistaken assumption of law or fact. The testator would not have revoked the bequest had the testator had accurate information.

55
Q

Revocation on divorce

A

Revokes gifts in favor of a spouse

56
Q

Dead beneficiary

A

Gift lapses/fails and falls into the residuary unless saved by anti-lapse statute.

57
Q

Anti-lapse statute:

A

Beneficiary was related by blood to the testator and had issue who survived.

The beneficiary’s issue takes in lieu of the beneficiary
Can be used if a beneficiary disclaims a gift.

58
Q

Slayer statute

A

Someone who feloniously and intentionally kills, is convicted of abuse, neglect, or exploitation of decedent forfeits all benefits of decedent’s estate.

Accidental killings (even involuntary manslaughter) do not bar gifts.

59
Q

Abatement

A

Assets are insufficient to satisfy all gifts; they are reduced in order… intestate property, residuary gifts, general gifts, specific gifts.

60
Q

Mental capacity

A

A testator must have capacity to execute a will. Burden is on contestant.

Testator must know:

  1. Nature and extent of his property;
  2. The persons who are the natural objects of his bounty;
  3. Nature of the instrument they are singing;
  4. Disposition that is being made
61
Q

Undue influence

A

Burden is on the contestant to show (SODA):

  • testator Susceptible to undue influence
  • influencer had Opportunity to exert undue influence
  • influence had a Disposition to exert undue influence
  • will Appears to be a product of undue influence
62
Q

A presumption of undue influence arises when…

A

There was a confidential relationship between the beneficiary and the testator; the beneficiary participated in procuring/drafting the will; and provisions of the will appear to be unnatural and favor the person who allegedly exercised undue influence.

Once these elements are met, the burden shifts to the proponent to prove that it was not influenced by her.

63
Q

Life insurance proceeds are:

A

A non probate asset and pass to the beneficiary outside of the estate.

A life insurance policy is a contract, and the disposition of the proceeds is governed by the he terms of the contract.

64
Q

Latent ambiguity

A

language of the will, though clear on its face, is susceptible to more than one meaning when applied to the extrinsic facts.

Extrinsic evidence is admissible to clear it up.

65
Q

Patent ambiguity

A

Uncertainty on the face of the will.

Most states: Plain meaning rule: can’t disturb plain meaning of will with extrinsic evidence.

UPC: May reform the terms of a will, even if unambiguous, to conform the terms to the testator’s intent if it is proved by clear and convincing evidence that both the accomplishment of the testator’s intent and the terms of the will were affected by mistake of fact/law.