Holographic Will Proves Ambiguous
In a perfect example of the confusion that can be caused by
a holographic (unwitnessed, hand-written) will, the Appeals Court of Dakota
County, Nebraska recently upheld a county court ruling that the decedent’s
will was not intended to dispose of real estate.
The only instruction for disposing of property Gary Lee Matthews
included in his will stated, "I want Melissa to get all proceeds from
the money that is left and from all contents in the house."
Melissa Matthews, the estate's personal representative,
petitioned the court regarding interpretation of the will. Her position
was Gary intended for her to also receive proceeds from the sale of his
home. Denise Nicole Matthews-Baker asserted the will did not address proceeds
from the sale of Gary's residence. As such, the proceeds of the house
would be distributed as dictated by intestacy – split equally between
Melissa and Denise.
The court was tasked with resolving the ambiguity by determining
Gary's intent. They accomplished this by:
- Considering the complete will,
- Interpreting the testator’s words using "generally
accepted literal and grammatical meanings,"
- Presuming the testator had a grasp of the words he chose,
and
- Evaluating the state of Gary's relationship with
Denise before his death.
Even Melissa admitted the provision, when evaluated strictly from a grammatical
perspective, was open to multiple interpretations. To overcome this simplistic
interpretation, Melissa introduced cases (subsequently rejected by the court)
she hoped would persuade the court to consider evidence outside Gary's
will thus helping them to better understand the situation which prompted
Gary to create the will.
The court ultimately made its decision to uphold the county court's
earlier ruling by evaluating the clause and pulling from it three key words
– proceeds, money, and left. Additionally, they concluded Gary purposefully
distinguished between "proceeds from the money that is left" and
"proceeds . . . from all contents in the house." Based on this
distinction, the court ruled Gary could not have intended his instructions
to include all property of the estate, or he would not have made the above-mentioned
distinctions. Consequently, the proceeds from the sale of the home were
distributed under the rules of intestacy – half passing to Melissa
and half passing to Denise.
Editor's Note: Many individuals believe they can save money by taking
a "do-ityourself" approach to drafting their will. However, as
history has repeatedly shown, more legal fees are generated in contesting
a poorly drafted will than would have been generated by hiring a professional
to draft the will originally.
Source: In re Estate of Matthews,
(13 Neb. App. Ct. 812, No. A-04-22, 8-30-05)
|
