Chapter 6 Interpretation of Wills

1
Chapter 6Interpretation of Wills
2
Admission of Extrinsic Evidence

• Mahoney v. Granger

If will language not ambiguous, why exclude
extrinsic evidence Use of extrinsic evidence to
explain ambiguous phrase heirs at law Is their
a difference between latent and patent
ambiguities? Do you agree with the plain
meaning rule? Could the will in light of the
facts of who was decedents heir be viewed as
ambiguous sufficient to admit extrinsic
evidence? Pg. 412, problem 2
3

• Fleming v. Morrison

Is evidence admissible that a will is a
sham? Should the lawyer have prepared the will?
4
No Residue of a Residue Rule

• T bequeaths property to A and B
• A predeceases T. Where does As share go.
• Lapse statute
• No residue of a residue rule-The common law
• Residue of Residue Rule

5

• Estate of Russell

6
Erickson v. Erickson

• What are the facts of this case?

7
Should lawyer be liable in malpractice for
drafting an ambiguous document?
8
Classification of Legacies

• General (10,000 to A)
• Specific (Car to B)
• Demonstrative (10,000 to A from account at Y
  Bank)
• Residuary

9
Void and Lapsed Bequests

• Void Bequests
• Lapsed general and specific bequests
• Lapsed residuary bequests
• No residue of a residue
• Residue of a residue rule

10
Anti-lapse Statutes

• Reasons for
• Effect of
• Protected Person
• Substituted person(s)

11
Iowa Anti-lapse Statute 633.273(1)

• If a devisee dies before the testator, leaving
  issue who survive the testator, the devisee's
  issue who survive the testator shall inherit the
  property devised to the devisee per stirpes,
  unless from the terms of the will, the intent is
  clear and explicit to the contrary

12
Iowa Anti-lapse Statute 633.273(1)

• If a devisee dies before the testator, leaving
  issue who survive the testator, the devisee's
  issue who survive the testator shall inherit the
  property devised to the devisee per stirpes,
  unless from the terms of the will, the intent is
  clear and explicit to the contrary

13
Iowa Anti-lapse Statute 633.273(1)

• If a devisee dies before the testator, leaving
  issue who survive the testator, the devisee's
  issue who survive the testator shall inherit the
  property devised to the devisee per stirpes,
  unless from the terms of the will, the intent is
  clear and explicit to the contrary

14
Iowa Anti-lapse Statute 633.273(1)

• If a devisee dies before the testator, leaving
  issue who survive the testator, the devisee's
  issue who survive the testator shall inherit the
  property devised to the devisee per stirpes,
  unless from the terms of the will, the intent is
  clear and explicit to the contrary

15
Problems

• T wills property to A for life, then to B. A and
  B survive T. However, B dies before A leaving
  issue who survive A. Is the gift to B saved by
  the lapse statute?
• Suppose B had died before T with issue who
  survive T. Same result?
• Suppose B had died before T with no issue who
  survive T. Same result?

16

• Allen v. Talley

17
Problems in the Book

• Page 444, Problem 1
• Page 444, Problem 2

18

• Jackson v. Schultz

To my wife Bessie, to her hers and her heirs and
assigns forever
19

• Jackson v. Schultz

To my wife Bessie, to her heirs and assigns
forever
20

• Jackson v. Schultz

To my wife Bessie, to her heirs and OR assigns
forever
21
Problem

• Problem, page 449, 2
• Who takes if no residue of residue rule
  applies.
• Who takes if residue of residue rule applies
• Who would T likely have wanted to take?
• How might statutes be revised to get to Ts
  intent?

22
Application to Class Gifts

• What is a class gift
• Should statute apply to class gift?
• How does it apply?

23

• Dawson v. Yucus

What are the facts this case? Why might the
classification of a gift as a class gift be
relevant if a class member dies before the
testator? What did the court hold? Do you agree?
24
Iowa Anti-lapse Statute 633.273Applied to Class
Gift

• A person who would have been a devisee under a
  class gift, if the person had survived the
  testator, is treated as a devisee for purposes of
  this section, provided the person's death
  occurred after the execution of the will, unless
  from the terms of the will, the intent is clear
  and explicit to the contrary.

25

• In re Moss

To my wife for life and upon her death to my
niece Elizabeth and the Emily 5. What do you
think about Romers reasoning on page 457? Is
this a sensible decision?
26
Ademption

• Application to specific bequests
• Identity Theory (1969 UPC)
• Wasserman v. Cohen
• Intent Theory (1990 UPC)

27
Avoidance of Ademption

• Classification of bequest as non-specific
• Construe will at time of death
• Exceptions (conservator sales)

28
Problems

• Page 466, Problem 1

29
Satisfaction of Legacies

• Analogous to advancement
• Applicable to general bequests

30
Exoneration of liens

• Common law rule
• Statutory rule
• Which makes more sense?

31
Increases

• Stock splits
• Dividends paid in stock
• Dividends paid in cash

32
AbatementWho Pays the Freight Charges

• Undisposed of property
• Residuary
• General
• Specific
• Demonstratives

33
Iowa Abatement Statute 633.438

• Undisposed of property
• Residue except to spouse
• Generals except to spouse
• Specifics except to spouse
• Property passing to spouse