This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.
Facts
The case concerns the estate of a deceased individual who executed two joint wills during his lifetime: one with his first spouse and another with his second spouse. The first will, created in 1977 with his first wife, included provisions for their children. After his first wife’s death, the deceased remarried and executed a second joint will in 1985 with his second wife. The deceased also created joint tenancy accounts with his second wife, which passed to her upon his death in 1987. The petitioner, the deceased’s son, sought to admit the first will to probate, challenge the ownership of the joint accounts, and argue that the second will was irrevocable (paras 1-3, 5-6).
Procedural History
- District Court, date unspecified: Denied probate of the first will, found that the joint accounts belonged to the second wife, and refused to declare the second will as an irrevocable contract (para 3).
Parties' Submissions
- Petitioner-Appellant (Son): Argued that the first will was a contractual and irrevocable agreement, the joint accounts should be included in the deceased’s estate, and the second will should be declared a contractual will to prevent the second wife from disposing of property contrary to its terms (para 3).
- Respondent-Appellee (Second Wife): Asserted that the joint accounts were validly created with a right of survivorship and that the second will was not irrevocable. She also argued that the first will was expressly revoked by the second will (paras 3, 13-16).
Legal Issues
- Was the first joint will a contractual and irrevocable agreement?
- Did the joint accounts belong to the second wife by right of survivorship?
- Was the second joint will a contractual and irrevocable agreement?
Disposition
- The first joint will was not a contractual and irrevocable agreement and was validly revoked by the second will.
- The joint accounts belonged to the second wife by right of survivorship.
- The court declined to determine whether the second will was irrevocable, as it would not affect the outcome of the case.
Reasons
Per Black J. (Donnelly and Flores JJ. concurring):
The court found that the first will did not meet the statutory requirements under Section 45-2-701 of the Uniform Probate Code to be considered a contractual and irrevocable will. The language in the first will did not create a binding contract and explicitly allowed for revocation by a later will, which occurred when the second will was executed (paras 8-12).
Regarding the joint accounts, the court held that substantial evidence supported the finding that the deceased understood the legal effect of creating joint tenancy accounts with a right of survivorship. The petitioner failed to rebut the presumption of survivorship, and the evidence showed the deceased intended for the second wife to inherit the accounts (paras 13-20).
The court declined to rule on whether the second will was irrevocable, as the joint accounts passed outside the will, and a determination on this issue would not alter the outcome (paras 22-23).
The judgment of the district court was affirmed in its entirety (para 25).