Notary Did Not Count As A Second Attesting Witness

February 29th, 2012

Since our last review of subscribing witnesses to a will generated a lot of interest, here’s a recent case from Mississippi in which the Mississippi Court of Appeals had to consider whether the notary public who notarized the signature of an attesting witness was, herself, an attesting witness to the will.  Here’s the quick answer: she wasn’t. (more…)

by | Posted in Estates, Executors, Probate Court | Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , |

Language In Holographic Will Conveyed Property In Fee Simple – It Did Not Create A Condition Precedent Or A Testamentary Trust

January 5th, 2012

There isn’t some magic language necessary to create a trust.  Generally, all you need is an expressed intent to create a trust and some property.  Sure, trust codes and common law  require a trustee, trustee duties, and adherence to the rule against perpetuities, but you get the idea.  Nevertheless, there is always a surprising amount of litigation over whether certain language in a will or other document creates a trust.

In Estate of Brill, the Mississippi Supreme Court was tasked with construing some language in a holographic will to determine what, exactly, the testator meant by the language.  The question was whether the language conveyed property in fee simple, created a condition precedent or created a testamentary trust.

Let’s take a look at the contents of Bobbye N. Brill’s holographic will. (more…)

by | Posted in Administration, Administrators, Estates, Executors, Fiduciary Duty, Probate Court, Trusts | Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |