|
"A" is a wealthy man, "B" is his non-wealthy son married to "C" who
together have a minor child "D", when B deserts and divorces C. At
some point during or after the divorce A establishes a minimal trust
fund for D, which is used up on a college education. Fast forward, A
dies in Florida and B, who has remarried, receives his inheritance.
If B dies without including his adult offspring D in his will, would D
have any standing to challenge the will and receive some inheritance
from B, regardless of the divorce settlement conditions?
--Hua Kul
huaREM0VEkul@hotmail.com
|
| |
| |
Hua Kul <gmp@adres.nl> wrote:
"A" is a wealthy man, "B" is his non-wealthy son married to "C" who
together have a minor child "D", when B deserts and divorces C. At
some point during or after the divorce A establishes a minimal trust
fund for D, which is used up on a college education. Fast forward, A
dies in Florida and B, who has remarried, receives his inheritance.
If B dies without including his adult offspring D in his will, would D
have any standing to challenge the will and receive some inheritance
from B, regardless of the divorce settlement conditions?
The answer is a definite "maybe". In many states the law assumes that
parents intend to provide for their children. If the will does not at
least mention the child, the child may be able to get it set aside.
This applies to a lesser extent to other default heirs-apparent.
That's why it's common to name all your close relatives (children,
parents, siblings, grandchildren, grandparents) in a will. If you
don't want to leave them anything, your attorney will insert standard
language like "For so-and-so, my (son), I leave my love and affection."
--
I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America, and
to the republic which it established, one nation from many peoples, promising
liberty and justice for all.
Feel free to use the above variant pledge in your own postings.
|
| |
| |
"A" is a wealthy man, "B" is his non-wealthy son married to "C" who
together have a minor child "D", when B deserts and divorces C. At
some point during or after the divorce A establishes a minimal trust
fund for D, which is used up on a college education. Fast forward, A
dies in Florida and B, who has remarried, receives his inheritance.
If B dies without including his adult offspring D in his will, would D
have any standing to challenge the will and receive some inheritance
from B, regardless of the divorce settlement conditions?
--Hua Kul
huaREM0VEkul@hotmail.com
I don't know FL law. And I'm not sure I _completely_ understand your
post. But it sounds like most of the facts you cite in your example
are irrelevant to the real question: what are D's rights, as the adult
child of B, when B dies?
It depends. On what B's will actually says, for starters. Most
states (and I'm pretty sure FL too) allow a Will to disinherit an
adult child of the testator, so that child gets nothing. Surviving
spouses of the testator may have some rights despite the language of a
Will, but the adult children generally don't.
The fact that B's father, A, set up a (now-exhausted) trust for his
grandchild, D, during B's life, should have absolutely nothing to do
with D's rights against B's estate, if any.
As always, if this is a real case and you are playing with real money,
you ought to consult a real local lawyer. Good luck,
--
This posting is for discussion purposes, not professional advice.
Anything you post on this Newsgroup is public information.
I am not your lawyer, and you are not my client in any specific legal
matter.
For confidential professional advice, consult your own lawyer in a
private communication.
Mike Jacobs
LAW OFFICE OF W. MICHAEL JACOBS
10440 Little Patuxent Pkwy #300
Columbia, MD 21044
(tel) 410-740-5685 (fax) 410-740-4300
|
| |
| |
Barry Gold wrote:
That's why it's common to name all your close relatives (children,
parents, siblings, grandchildren, grandparents) in a will. If you
don't want to leave them anything, your attorney will insert standard
language like "For so-and-so, my (son), I leave my love and affection."
I think I would prefer, "For so-and-so, my (son), I leave 2 cents.
He never took my advice when I was alive, so...."
(Moderator: I understand this has little legal content. I
just don't think "love and affection" is something that can
be left in a will.)
--
This account is subject to a persistent MS Blaster and SWEN attack.
I think I've got the problem resolved, but, if you E-mail me
and it bounces, a second try might work.
However, please reply in newsgroup.
|
| |
| |
"Arthur L. Rubin" <ronnirubin@sprintmail.com> wrote in
misc.legal.moderated:
Barry Gold wrote:
I think I would prefer, "For so-and-so, my (son), I leave 2 cents.
He never took my advice when I was alive, so...."
(Moderator: I understand this has little legal content. I
just don't think "love and affection" is something that can
be left in a will.)
The whole idea of having to name relatives in a will so that they
can't inherit is a myth, according to /Nolo's Simple Will Book/,
which says it applies everywhere in the US except in Louisiana. When
I had an Ohio lawyer look over my will, which didn't mention certain
close relatives, he confirmed that it wasn't necessary.
Is there _any_ state where, if a person dies with a valid will, a
child who wasn't mentioned has a legal right to part of the estate?
(Obviously I'm not talking about cases where something is left to
the children as a class, but where beneficiaries are named.)
--
If you e-mail me from a fake address, your fingers will drop off.
I am not a lawyer; this is not legal advice. When you read anything
legal on the net, always verify it on your own, in light of your
particular circumstances. You may also need to consult a lawyer.
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com
|
| |
| |
Barry Gold wrote:
I think I would prefer, "For so-and-so, my (son), I leave 2 cents.
He never took my advice when I was alive, so...."
Language like that may provide some amusement to the testator, but
writing something in your will that expresses rancor toward an heir-
apparent is inviting a challenge to the will.
I suppose if you have no "love and affection" for the person named,
you could leave them "my regards". Or "one dollar".
Attorneys may have different ideas, but I would avoid saying anything
nasty about anyone in a will.
--
I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America, and
to the republic which it established, one nation from many peoples, promising
liberty and justice for all.
Feel free to use the above variant pledge in your own postings.
|
| |
| |
"Arthur L. Rubin" <ronnirubin@sprintmail.com> wrote in
misc.legal.moderated:
Barry Gold wrote:
I think I would prefer, "For so-and-so, my (son), I leave 2 cents.
He never took my advice when I was alive, so...."
(Moderator: I understand this has little legal content. I
just don't think "love and affection" is something that can
be left in a will.)
The whole idea of having to name relatives in a will so that they
can't inherit is a myth, according to /Nolo's Simple Will Book/,
which says it applies everywhere in the US except in Louisiana. When
I had an Ohio lawyer look over my will, which didn't mention certain
close relatives, he confirmed that it wasn't necessary.
Is there _any_ state where, if a person dies with a valid will, a
child who wasn't mentioned has a legal right to part of the estate?
(Obviously I'm not talking about cases where something is left to
the children as a class, but where beneficiaries are named.)
____________________
In Texas (and elsewhere, but I only know Texas law) there is a pretermitted
child statute (Texas Probate Code section 67) which provides that if a child
is born or adopted after the will is executed and is not provided for or
mentioned in the will that child does indeed inherit part of the estate
according to a legal framework I don't feel like looking up right now.
I believe in some states the pretermitted child problem applies to children
born before the will is executed as well, but I can't cite anything. The
safe practitioner, therefore, will usually name a person to be disinherited,
even if only to give that person a dollar.
|
| |
| |
"A" is a wealthy man, "B" is his non-wealthy son married to "C" who
together have a minor child "D", when B deserts and divorces C. At
some point during or after the divorce A establishes a minimal trust
fund for D, which is used up on a college education. Fast forward, A
dies in Florida and B, who has remarried, receives his inheritance.
If B dies without including his adult offspring D in his will, would D
have any standing to challenge the will and receive some inheritance
from B, regardless of the divorce settlement conditions?
Florida has a provision for pretermitted children (that is, children
not yet born or not yet adopted when the will was made): a
pretermitted child receives so much as he would under intestate
succession rules, unless the will expresses a contrary intent or the
child's other parent is already sole heir.
Florida also has provisions for a pretermitted spouse and for a spouse
to elect against the will, but it has no provision I know of for
children who were simply omitted. The most likely answer is that D is
not entitled to anything.
--
Not a lawyer,
Chris Green
|
| |
| |
|
