In In re Estate of Hendler, 316 S.W.3d 703 (Tex. App.--Dallas 2010, no pet. h.), Testator executed a valid will in 1990 leaving his entire estate to Brother. Thereafter, Testator had two children. In 1999, he signed a holographic statement on the last page of his will indicating that his prior will still exists. After Testator's death, his two children claimed that they were pretermitted and thus each entitled to half of Testator's estate under Probate Code ยง 67. The court determined that the summary judgment holding the holographic material to be a codicil was improper. Thus, it is possible, depending on the outcome of a trial on the issue of the validity of the holographic statement as a codicil, that the children were pretermitted. The court then examined whether one or both of the children were "otherwise provide for" so they could not take even if they were determined to be pretermitted.
Click here to read the entire article.
Hat tip: Wills, Trust & Estates Prof Blog
Posted by Yi Song, Associate Editor, Wealth Strategies Journal.
Leave a comment