Ms. X had a life insurance policy that named her half-sister, as the beneficiary. Therefore, at her death the half sister should obtain the proceeds of the life insurance monies. However, using a legal software program she had obtained, she prepared three documents: (1) will; (2) an attachment; and (3) a living trust. She was not trained in the legal field. The attachment provided that the proceeds of the life insurance policy should be used to pay funeral costs and other debts normally paid by an estate.
Following Ms. X’s death, the court removed the half sister as personal representative (executor) and appointed a new personal representative for the estate. This new personal representative asked the court to interpret the estate planning documents that Ms. X had prepared and signed. The question was whether the attachment was a part of the will and, if so, whether it created a trust that held the insurance proceeds. If so, the insurance proceeds would be under the control of Ms. X's estate to pay its debts. If the attachment was determined not to be incorporated into the will, then Ms. X would receive all the life insurance proceeds.
The Court ruled that the attachment was part of the will and that it did create a trust to hold the insurance proceeds. This may not have been the wish of Ms. X but the problem was, the attachment clearly indicates that Ms. X intended the attachment to be part of her will. As the court states "[T]he inartful drafting of the will and [the attachment] certainly led to confusion and dissention between the parties."
Therefore, if you use computer software, there is the potential that your wishes may not enacted.
No comments:
Post a Comment