DOCSLIB.ORG

Probate Procedure Overview & Vignettes Gerry W. Beyer Governor Preston E. Smith Regents Professor of Law Texas Tech Univers

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Probate Procedure Overview & Vignettes Gerry W. Beyer Governor Preston E. Smith Regents Professor of Law Texas Tech Univers Gerry W. Beyer Governor Preston E. Smith Regents Professor of Law Texas Tech University School of Law 1 Whose will contained a detailed provision requiring beneficiaries to not become physically of psychologically dependent on alcohol, legal drugs, or illegal drugs? A. John Mahoney B. Vic Damone C. Hugh Hefner D. Mary Tyler Moore 2 What animal received a detailed obituary in The Eagle newspaper in Bryan, Texas? A. Dog B. Cat C. Chicken D. Hamster 3 Jeffrey Rigel died in August 2017. He requested eight member of his favorite team to be his pallbearers so the team could “let him down one last time.” Which team disappointed him? A. Cleveland Browns B. Dallas Cowboys C. Detroit Lions D. Philadelphia Eagles 4 5 The trial court held that the gift of the farm and pasture lands to the three grandchildren totally adeemed. The appellate court: A. Affirmed, ademption was total. B. Affirmed, the favored grandchild lacked standing to raise the issue. C. Reversed, there was a partial ademption. D. Reversed, there was no ademption. 6 7 The trial court held that all siblings (half and whole) shared equally as beneficiaries. The appellate court: A. Affirmed, because full siblings have priority over half siblings. B. Affirmed, because the remainder interest was not vested in father. C. Reversed, because all siblings must share equally in testamentary gifts. D. Reversed, because the remainder was vested and thus passed into the trust via the joint will when father died. 8 The will provided that it was the testator’s “desire” that the ranch stay “intact as long as possible.” 9 The trial court held the executor could sell the land. The appellate court: A. Affirmed, because the request was precatory. B. Affirmed, because the executor may always sell estate property. C. Reversed, because the request was mandatory. D. Reversed, because a beneficiary may request that the executor not sell items belonging to the estate. 10 “The rest and residue of my estate * * * to my husband * * * to do with as he desires. Upon the death of my husband * * *, I give * * * any of the rest and residue of my estate* * * that he may own or have any interest in to my son * * *.” 11 How did the appellate court classify this devise? A. Fee simple. B. Life estate with remainder to son. C. Fee simple determinable with executory interest to son. D. Fee simple subject to son’s executory interest. 12 Now [Son] I leave the rest to you * * * Understand the land is not be sold but passed on down to your children * * *. TAKE CARE OF IT AND TRY TO BE HAPPY.” 13 The trial and appellate courts held Son received a fee simple interest. What interest did the Texas Supreme Court determine this devise granted? A. Fee simple. B. Life estate in Son with remainder to his children. C. Fee simple determinable in Son with reverter to Father. D. Fee simple subject to an executory limitation in Son. 14 15 The trial court concluded that it could not enforce an oral promise to make a will. The appellate court: A. Affirmed, because there was insufficient credible evidence of the oral statements. B. Affirmed, because the contract must be in writing. C. Reversed, because Texas recognizes oral will contracts. D. Reversed, because Texas allows an oral will contract to be established by promissory estoppel and detrimental reliance. 16 17 The trial court awarded damages against the defendant for tortiously interfering with the plaintiffs’ inheritance rights. The appellate and Texas Supreme Court: A. Affirmed, because the evidence was sufficient. B. Reversed, because the evidence was insufficient. C. Reversed, because Texas has yet to recognize tortious interference as a cause of action. D. Reversed, because the amount of damages was excessive. 18 19 The trial court charged the family allowance against the entire community estate. The appellate court: A. Affirmed. B. Affirmed, but reduced the amount of the allowance. C. Reversed, because the amount of the allowance was too high. D. Reversed, because only the decedent’s share of community property may be used to satisfy the family allowance. 20 21 The trial court held that the applicant (executor) was in default in probating the predeceased spouse’s will because the decedent was in default. The appellate court: A. Affirmed, because the applicant was in default on her own. B. Affirmed, because the predeceased spouse’s default is attributed to the executor. C. Reversed, because the applicant was not in default. D. Reversed, because the predeceased spouse’s default is not attributed to the executor. 22 23 The trial court determined that the applicant’s excuse for being late, “I did not think it necessary to probate the will,” was insufficient. The appellate court: A. Affirmed ,because the excuse was insufficient. B. Reversed, because the excuse was sufficient. C. Remanded to the trial court for greater exploration of the facts. D. Recommended that the proponent be jailed for contempt for filing his wife’s will late. 24 25 The trial court appointed a receiver to take possession of estate property during the pendency of a will contest. The appellate court: A. Affirmed. B. Reversed, as receiverships are not allowed in will contest cases. C. Reversed, because the court abused its discretion in appointing a receiver. D. Remanded for the trial court to ascertain more facts. 26 27 The trial court approved a settlement. The appellate court: A. Affirmed. B. Reversed, because a party objecting claiming he was under the influence of prescription medication when he signed. C. Reversed, because the there was insufficient evidence that the claimant was adopted by estoppel. D. Instructed the parties to renegotiate the agreement. 28 29 The trial court determined the marriage was void even though the action was brought after the husband’s death. The appellate court: A. Affirmed, because the wife was the husband’s former in-home health aide. B. Affirmed, because there was sufficient evidence of husband’s lack of capacity to enter into the marriage. C. Reversed, because a marriage cannot be set aside after the death of one of the spouses. D. Reversed, because the wife was not included in the husband’s will. 30 31 The decedent “reserved during her life, the full possession, benefit and use” of the property “as well as the rents, issues, and profits thereof and the unilateral power of sale of any or all of the [property] with or without the consent of [the remainder beneficiary].” The decedent transferred the land before death. The trial court determined the remainder beneficiary had no interest. The appellate court: A. Affirmed. B. Reversed, because a grantor may not reserve a power to sell. C. Reversed, because the deed provisions were against public policy. D. Remanded because the deed was ambiguous and additional fact-finding is necessary. 32 33 The trial court determined that checking a box labeled “multiple-party account with right of survivorship” and initialing next to the box did not give the account the survivorship feature. The appellate court: A. Affirmed, because survivi0rship accounts are not allowed in Texas. B. Affirmed, because the necessary Estates Code language was not present. C. Reversed, because the account clearly indicated rights of survivorship. D. Reversed, because extrinsic evidence should have been examined to determine the true nature of the account. 34 35.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Himelick Financial Group Joseph W
    Himelick Financial Group Joseph W. Himelick, CLU, ChFC, MSFS Financial Planner 10900 Stonelake Blvd. Suite B-150 Austin, TX 78759 800-223-6983 [email protected] www.himelickfinancialgroup.com Wills May 02, 2016 Page 1 of 8, see disclaimer on final page Wills What is a will? A will may be the most vital piece of your estate plan, even if your estate is a modest one. It is a legal document that lets you direct how your property will be dispersed (among other things) when you die. It becomes effective only after your death. It also allows you to nominate an estate executor as the legal representative who carries out your wishes. In addition, in many states, your will is the only legal way you can name a guardian for your minor children. Without a will, your property will be distributed according to the intestacy laws of your state. The laws of your state also govern the validity of a will. What are the requirements? Requirements vary from state to state. Generally, for your will to be valid, the following requirements must be satisfied. You must be 18 and of sound mind Generally, you must be 18 years of age to execute a will, although some states have a different minimum age requirement. You also must be of sound mind. That means that you must have testamentary capacity--that you know and understand what property you own, its nature, who would inherit it, and the plan for disposition outlined in the will. You must also be free of undue influence or fraud at the time the will is drafted.
    [Show full text]
  • The Will As an Implied Unilateral Arbitration Contract, 68 Fla
    Florida Law Review Volume 68 | Issue 1 Article 2 October 2016 The iW ll As An Implied Unilateral Arbitration Contract E. Gary Spitko Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.ufl.edu/flr Part of the Estates and Trusts Commons Recommended Citation E. Gary Spitko, The Will As An Implied Unilateral Arbitration Contract, 68 Fla. L. Rev. 49 (2016). Available at: http://scholarship.law.ufl.edu/flr/vol68/iss1/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by UF Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Florida Law Review by an authorized administrator of UF Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Spitko: The Will As An Implied Unilateral Arbitration Contract THE WILL AS AN IMPLIED UNILATERAL ARBITRATION CONTRACT E. Gary Spitko* Abstract A consensus has begun to develop in the case law, the academic commentary, and the statutory reform movement that a testator’s provision in her will mandating arbitration of any challenge to the will should not be enforceable against a beneficiary who has not agreed to the arbitration provision, at least where the will contestant, by his contest, seeks to increase his inheritance outside the will. Grounding this consensus is the widespread understanding that a will is not a contract. This Article seeks to challenge both the understanding that a will is not a contract and the opposition to enforcement of testator-compelled arbitration provisions that arises from that understanding. This Article argues that a will is part of an implied unilateral contract between the testator and the state in which the state offers to honor the testator’s donative intent, and the testator accepts and provides consideration for the offer by creating and preserving wealth.
    [Show full text]
  • Oil & Gas Contract Administration For
    OIL & GAS CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION FOR THE 8O's AND 9O's -­ NEGOTIATING THE LEGAL AND REGULATORY MAZE Presented to Employees of OXY CITIES SERVICE NGL INC. 23 March 1988 Tulsa, Oklahoma by David E. Pierce Associate Director National Energy Law & Policy Institute Visiting Associate Professor of Law University of Tulsa College of Law I I I OIL & GAS CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION FOR THE 8O 1 s AND 9O's -­ I NEGOTIATING THE LEGAL AND REGULATORY MAZE Presented to Employees of OXY CITIES SERVICE NGL INC. I 23 March 1988 Tulsa, Oklahoma I by David E. Pierce I Associate Director National Energy Law & Policy Institute Visiting Associate Professor of Law I University of Tulsa College of Law Copyright 1988 by David E. Pierce I All Rights Reserved I I Outline Table of Contents Page I I. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION AND SCHEDULE ................... 2 II. INTRODUCTION TO OIL AND GAS CONTRACTS .............. 3 I III. THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS 9 IV. THE OIL AND GAS LEASE . 19 I v. .JOINT OPERATIONS ................................... 31 I VI. PRODUCTION SALES • • . • . • . 34 VII. CURRENT GAS PROCESSING ISSUES ...................... 48 I VIII. FERC AND YOUR DAILY OPERATIONS ............•........ 56 I IX. FUTURE INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENTS ....................... 63 I I I I PROGRAM DESCRIPTION AND SCHEDULE A. Program Description I l. This four-hour program is designed for attorneys, accountants, and contract administrators, who must work with contracts used to facilitate the I exploration, development, production, processing, and marketing of oil and gas. 2. The development process is studied I chronologically, examining each player in the development process and the common types of I contracts encountered. 3. After studying the development process, the oil and gas lease, and conveyances by the lessor and assignments by the lessee, are examined more I closely to identify common problems which confront persons representing a gas processing plant I operator.
    [Show full text]
  • Case 2:01-Cv-06764-MAK Document 192 Filed 02/27/14 Page 1 of 156
    Case 2:01-cv-06764-MAK Document 192 Filed 02/27/14 Page 1 of 156 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA GENE R. ROMERO, et al., : : Plaintiffs, : CIVIL ACTION : v. : NO. 01-3894 : : CONSOLIDATED WITH ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, : et al., : NO. 01-6764 Defendants. : NO. 01-7042 TABLE OF CONTENTS FOR CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO THE VALIDITY OF THE RELEASE I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND. 1 A. Allstate’s Agency Programs Prior to 1999.. 2 1. The NOA Program.. 3 2. R830 and R1500 Contracts. 5 3. Allstate’s Exclusive Agent Independent Contractor Program. 9 4. Allstate’s Litigation with the IRS. 11 B. The Preparing for the Future Group Reorganization Program. 15 1. The Sales Organization of the Future Initiative. 15 2. Background Behind the Preparing for the Future Program. 17 3. The Announcement of the Preparing for the Future Program. 21 4. Program Information Provided After the Program Announcement.. 23 5. The Release. 25 Case 2:01-cv-06764-MAK Document 192 Filed 02/27/14 Page 2 of 156 6. The OWBPA Disclosure. 28 7. State-Specific Issues. 30 a. New Jersey. 30 b. Montana. 31 c. West Virginia.. 31 d. Delaware. 31 8. Alleged Misrepresentations by Allstate about the Program.. 31 a. Confidentiality and Non-Compete Restrictions.. 31 b. Rehire Policy. 32 c. Commission Rates. 34 d. Expected Results for R3001 Agents. 35 e. Allstate’s Level of Control Over Exclusive Agents.. 36 C. The Romero Plaintiffs. 37 1. General Information.. 37 2. Plaintiffs’ Consultations Regarding the Program and Release.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuncupative Wills Stuart Dixon Jenks Cornell Law School
    Cornell Law Library Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository Historical Theses and Dissertations Collection Historical Cornell Law School 1895 Nuncupative Wills Stuart Dixon Jenks Cornell Law School Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/historical_theses Part of the Estates and Trusts Commons Recommended Citation Jenks, Stuart Dixon, "Nuncupative Wills" (1895). Historical Theses and Dissertations Collection. Paper 22. This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Historical Cornell Law School at Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Historical Theses and Dissertations Collection by an authorized administrator of Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. NUNCUtTATI'V WILLS. --- 000--- TILESIS PFRESENTED BY STUART DIXON JENYZ FOR TILE DGREE OF BACHELOR OF LAWS. 0000000--.-.. CORNTELL UWIV/ERSITY. SCHOOL OF LAW. 1895. --- 000---- CONTJIST page INTRODUCT-ION. , oV' .00 00-2. CHAPTER I, ROMAN WILLS. ........................ .... -. it II, ANGLO SAXON WILLS.7 i III, FROM THE NORLMN CONQUIST TO THE STATUTE OF FRAUDS .0w.8- 9 tt IV, NtUNC'UPATIVE WILLS UNDER TH STATUTE OF FRAUDS AND SIMILAR EqACTMENTS........................010-25. it V, MILITARY TESTAMEqTS IN ENGLISH AND AMERICAN LAW 26-30 --- 000---. NUNCUPATIVE WILLS. --- 000--- INTRODUCTI ON. Testamentary succession, it is now agreed, is an insti- tution of positive law. It grew cut of the idea of the universitas juris of the Romans, and wherever it has existed can be traced to Roman influence.(a) In the earliest times a mans children were considered to be his only rightful heirs, and at first the privalege of willing property was confined to thase who, had no children to succeed them.
    [Show full text]
  • Oral Contracts to Make a Will and the Uniform Probate Code: Boon Or Boondoggle?
    ORAL CONTRACTS TO MAKE A WILL AND THE UNIFORM PROBATE CODE: BOON OR BOONDOGGLE? DENNIS W. COLLINSt A verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's written on.* Whether one is a movie mogul or a practicing lawyer, the prob- lem with oral contracts has long been recognized. Such problems have been prevalent in the estate and estate planning area. The best laid estate plans may come to naught when a despised relative shows up after death claiming to have had a contract with the deceased to receive all of the deceased's estate.' I. INTRODUCTION If a man can'tforge his own will, whose will can heforge?** Contracts to make a will occur in a variety of factual situations. Very often they involve the elderly. As people grow older, their reli- ance on others normally increases because of their inability to care for themselves. This is especially true of those who have lost spouses and who, as a result, come to rely on relatives for normal needs such as housing and food. The furnishing of these services by a friend or relative may be motivated by a variety of reasons, including friend- ship, good samaritanism or, unfortunately, greed. In many instances, no mention is ever made of compensation to the providers. In such a situation, after the death of the one receiv- ing the services, the providers may claim there was an oral contract to make a will, under the terms of which they were to be left certain property in exchange for their providing care for the deceased.2 Such a "contract" may have been the last thing on the mind of t Partner, Jewell, Gatz, Collins & Dreier, Norfolk, Nebraska; Fellow, American College of Probate Counsel; B.A., 1968; J.D., 1971, University of Nebraska.
    [Show full text]
  • “Will Contract” Recited an Agreement Between Charles and Anne Winnick
    IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA STUART G. WINNICK : Plaintiff, : CIVIL ACTION : v. : : DAVID L. PRATT, ESQ., Curator for : the Estate of Anne M. Winnick, : Deceased, and : BARBARA AMELKIN, Trustee of the : Revocable Declaration of Trust created : by Anne M. Winnick dated May 25, : 1990 and amended and restated : December 26, 1995, : No. 03-1612 Defendants. : MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Schiller, J. May , 2003 This is an action for breach of a will contract executed by Charles and Anne Winnick, the parents of Plaintiff Stuart G. Winnick.1 The two named Defendants are Barbara Amelkin, Charles and Anne Winnick’s daughter who has been appointed the personal representative of the estate of Anne Winnick and Trustee of the Revocable Declaration of Trust created by Anne Winnick and David Pratt, Curator for the Estate of Anne Winnick. Presently before the Court is Defendant Barbara Amelkin’s Motion to Dismiss and Plaintiff’s Motion for Remand. Because of defects in the procedure by which Defendant Barbara Amelkin removed the case to this Court, and for the additional reasons discussed below, I remand this case to the Court of Common Pleas of Lehigh County, Pennsylvania. 1 In this case, the “will contract” recited an agreement between Charles and Anne Winnick that the last surviving spouse would not change or alter their previously executed individual will in any way nor make a subsequent will after the death of the first spouse and would accept the provisions of the will of the first spouse notwithstanding any statute or legal decision to the contrary.
    [Show full text]
  • Insurance and the Legal Process
    Insurance and the Legal Process Table of Contents Chapter 1: Philosophy of Law ................................................................................................................................. 1 Purpose of the Law .............................................................................................................................................. 1 The Legal System Develops ................................................................................................................................ 2 History of Law ...................................................................................................................................................... 7 Classes of Law .................................................................................................................................................. 13 Chapter 2: The U.S. Legal System ....................................................................................................................... 15 The Federal Court System ................................................................................................................................. 16 A Trip Through the Court System ...................................................................................................................... 19 Criminal Law ...................................................................................................................................................... 24 Insurance and Statutory Liability ......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Speaking for the Dead: Voice in Last Wills and Testaments Karen J
    St. John's Law Review Volume 85 Article 12 Issue 2 Volume 85, Spring 2011, Number 2 April 2014 Speaking for the Dead: Voice in Last Wills and Testaments Karen J. Sneddon Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/lawreview Recommended Citation Sneddon, Karen J. (2014) "Speaking for the Dead: Voice in Last Wills and Testaments," St. John's Law Review: Vol. 85: Iss. 2, Article 12. Available at: http://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/lawreview/vol85/iss2/12 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in St. John's Law Review by an authorized administrator of St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ARTICLE SPEAKING FOR THE DEAD: VOICE IN LAST WILLS AND TESTAMENTS KARENJ. SNEDDONt INTRODUCTION ................................. ..... 684 I. FUNCTION OF WILLS ........................... .......685 II. VOICE ..................................... ...... 689 A. Term Defined. ...................... ....... 689 B. Applicability of Voice to Wills ............ ..... 696 C. Pitfalls.......................... ........ 708 D. Benefits ............................ ..... 720 III. VOICE IN WILLS ........................... ..... 728 A. Voice in Non-Attorney Drafted Wills ...... ...... 728 1. Nuncupative Wills ................. ...... 729 2. Ethical Wills...... ................. 729 3. Holographic Wills .................. ..... 732 4. Commercial Fill-in-the-Blank Forms and
    [Show full text]
  • In Defense of the Contract at Will
    University of Chicago Law School Chicago Unbound Journal Articles Faculty Scholarship 1984 In Defense of the Contract at Will Richard A. Epstein Follow this and additional works at: https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/journal_articles Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Richard A. Epstein, "In Defense of the Contract at Will," 51 University of Chicago Law Review 947 (1984). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at Chicago Unbound. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal Articles by an authorized administrator of Chicago Unbound. For more information, please contact [email protected]. In Defense of the Contract at Will Richard A. Epsteint The persistent tension between private ordering and govern- ment regulation exists in virtually every area known to the law, and in none has that tension been more pronounced than in the law of employer and employee relations. During the last fifty years, the balance of power has shifted heavily in favor of direct public regulation, which has been thought strictly necessary to redress the perceived imbalance between the individual and the firm. In par- ticular the employment relationship has been the subject of at least two major statutory revolutions. The first, which culminated in the passage of the National Labor Relations Act in 1935,1 set the basic structure for collective bargaining that persists to the current time. The second, which is embodied in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,2 offers extensive protection to all individ- uals against discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, or national origin.
    [Show full text]
  • Videotape and the Probate Process: the Nexus Grows
    Oklahoma Law Review Volume 42 Number 1 1-1-1898 Videotape and the Probate Process: The Nexus Grows Gerry W. Beyer William R. Buckley Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.ou.edu/olr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Gerry W. Beyer & William R. Buckley, Videotape and the Probate Process: The Nexus Grows, 42 OKLA. L. REV. 43 (1989), https://digitalcommons.law.ou.edu/olr/vol42/iss1/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by University of Oklahoma College of Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Oklahoma Law Review by an authorized editor of University of Oklahoma College of Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. VIDEOTAPE AND THE PROBATE PROCESS: THE NEXUS GROWS GERRY W. BEYER* WrriuA R. BucKLEY** The legal profession, steeped in tradition and precedent, is often leery of change. For example, the legal community utilized scriveners until three hun- dred years after the development of the Gutenberg flatbed printing press,' and legal documents continue to ooze lawyerisms, tautologies, and other language that has little, if any, practical value.' The profession's ability to serve its primary purpose of facilitating the maintenance and smooth func- tioning of society is hindered by its failure to avail itself of technological and societal developments. 3 Only by embracing and developing new techniques will attorneys be equipped adequately to provide clients with competent and 4 complete legal services. One of the newly developed techniques readily available to attorneys is videotape recording. In 1969 a Florida appellate court became the first court to rule on the admissibility of videotaped evidence.
    [Show full text]
  • California Oral Will Contracts: the Decline of Testator Intent in the Shadow of Equitable Estoppel, 39 Santa Clara L
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Santa Clara University School of Law Santa Clara Law Review Volume 39 | Number 4 Article 8 1-1-1999 California Oral Will Contracts: The eclineD of Testator Intent in the Shadow of Equitable Estoppel Jeff .G Carchidi Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/lawreview Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Jeff .G Carchidi, Comment, California Oral Will Contracts: The Decline of Testator Intent in the Shadow of Equitable Estoppel, 39 Santa Clara L. Rev. 1187 (1999). Available at: http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/lawreview/vol39/iss4/8 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Santa Clara Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Santa Clara Law Review by an authorized administrator of Santa Clara Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. COMMENTS CALIFORNIA ORAL WILL CONTRACTS: THE DECLINE OF TESTATOR INTENT IN THE SHADOW OF EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL I. INTRODUCTION Under California law, a person is free to enter into con- tractual agreements that either require her to make par- ticular testamentary dispositions of property or that restrict or eliminate her ability to revoke an already existing will.' Although California law on this subject is historically doc- trinal, the California legislature, in 1983,2 enacted section 150 of the Probate Code.' Section 150 retained the spirit of the common law, including, most importantly, the require- ment that all contracts to make or not to revoke a will be in writing and signed by the testator.4 1.
    [Show full text]