Week4 discussion
Dictated Amendment (Codicil) to a Will
What is the implication of a separate writing addressing tangible personal property if a will is in existence and allows for this possibility? What are the requirements for this separate writing? Would it matter what was contained in the separate writing? Even if the document were not challenged, would it even be legal?
A client died, leaving behind a will that allows specific distribution of tangible personal property by a separate writing. During the last days of her life, the client dictated a separate writing to a trusted friend because she could no longer write. The trusted friend, subsequently and shortly after the client’s death, wrote the items down and had the separate writing witnessed by a neighbor who was present when the client dictated the list.
Based on the above information, answer the following questions:
- One of the remaining beneficiaries might contest the contents of the handwritten memorandum. How does the term extrinsic evidence apply to this situation?
- Because the client did not write the memo but dictated it, and the scrivener wrote it down after the death of the client, what result do you think will occur from litigation over this matter?
- Would a “no contest” provision have changed the outcome here?
Justify your ideas and responses by using appropriate examples and references from Lexis Advance (including primary sources such as cases, statutes, rules, regulations, etc.), government Web sites, peer-reviewed legal periodicals (not lawyer blogs), which can be supplemented by law dictionaries or the textbook. This means you need to use more than just your text and legal dictionaries.
- Entitlement on Murder of a Spouse
A surviving spouse who unlawfully and intentionally kills or participates in causing the death of a decedent is not entitled to any benefits under the will or by intestate succession. The estate of the decedent passes as if the surviving spouse/killer had predeceased the decedent.
Robyn’s husband Allen was declared mentally incompetent in 1996. She decided to care for him at home rather than placing him in an institution. In 2001 Allen murdered Robyn in their home.
Based on the above information, answer the following questions:
Should some or all of Robyn’s estate be used for Allen’s maintenance in an institution? Why or why not?
If a person is mentally incompetent, do you think his or her actions are intentional? Why or why not?
Justify your ideas and responses by using appropriate examples and references from Lexis Advance (including primary sources such as cases, statutes, rules, regulations, etc.), government Web sites, peer-reviewed legal periodicals (not lawyer blogs), which can be supplemented by law dictionaries or the textbook. This means you need to use more than just your text and legal dictionaries.
