University:
Touro College
Course:
LAW680 | Trust and Estates
Academic year:

2023
Views:

47

Pages:

1
Author:

gustasteqw

Procedural History: Facts: Snide and his wife erroneously executed each other’s wills at a common execution ceremony. No other issues. Intention is not questioned or capacity. They were mirror wills. Rose Snide offered the instrument Harvey actually signed for probate. The surrogate admitted it and said it could be reformed to substitute the names as appropriate. The appellate division reversed. And we reverse the appellate division. The three adult children have executed waivers and consent to the admission of the instrument to probate. The minor child, however, is representd by a guardian ad litem who refuses to do this. This is because the only way that minor child will take a share is if the intestacy statute is followed after probate is denied. Under the will the whole estate would go to Rose. Issue: Can the will be given effect when it is a mirror will erroneously signed by the spouse? Holding: yes. The testamentary intent of both is clear. They are mirror wills and should be given effect. Reasoning: guardian argues that he lacked the testamentary intent because he never intended to execute the document he actually signed. We decline the formalistic view that testamentary intent attaches irrevocably to the document prepared rather than the testamentary scheme it reflects.. Altho he mistakenly signed his wife’s will, the provisions in both were identical.. In all other ways the document was executed properly. Not only were the two wills reciprocal elements of a unified testamentary plan, they were executed during the same ceremony with the same witnesses. No danger of fraud. So the wills must be read together. Dissent: Precedent would deny the wills for probate.

Snide Trust and Estates Notes

Related Documents

Details

Description

Related Documents

Struggling with your assignment and deadlines?

Free up your schedule!

Take 5 seconds to unlock