X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Click here for the full text of this decision FACTS:Marvin and Vicki Nash were married at the time he executed his will in 1994. Vicki was named the primary beneficiary and Shelley Tedder � Vicki’s daughter and Nash’s then-stepdaughter � was named contingent beneficiary to take under Marvin’s will if Marvin and Vicki died at the same time, she failed to survive him by 30 days or she predeceased him. Marvin and Vicki divorced on July 8, 2002. When Marvin died on April 29, 2004, he had made no changes to the 1994 will. Both Vicki and Tedder survived Marvin Nash. Nash’s nephew Russell Nash filed an application for independent administration. He stated that Marvin died intestate and provided the names of Marvin’s two other heirs at law: Marvin’s brother Leroy Nash and Marvin’s mother Pat Nash. The application stated that Marvin and Vicki were divorced at the time of Nash’s death, that Marvin never adopted Tedder, and that the trial court should therefore partition Marvin’s estate among his heirs. On May 25, 2004, the trial court granted Russell’s application and ordered the clerk to issue letters of independent administration to Russell. Two days later, Tedder opposed Russell’s application and sought to probate Marvin’s will herself. Tedder claimed that Marvin left a valid will that had never been revoked and that she, as the contingent beneficiary, was the alternate independent executrix. After a hearing, the trial court stayed the letters of administration. Russell, Pat and Leroy opposed the probate of Marvin’s will and sought a declaratory judgment that Tedder take nothing. The trial court admitted Marvin’s will to probate, issued letters testamentary to Tedder, and declared that Tedder was entitled to Marvin’s entire estate. Pat and Leroy Nash appealed. The 9th Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s judgment in part, holding that Marvin’s estate descended to his heirs at law, because the requisite condition precedent for Tedder to inherit under Marvin’s will never occurred. The Texas Supreme Court granted Tedder’s petition for review. HOLDING:Affirmed. Before 1997, Texas Probate Code �69(a) provided that: “If, after making a will, the testator is divorced or the testator’s marriage is annulled, all provisions in the will in favor of the testator’s former spouse . . . shall be null and void and of no effect unless the will expressly provides otherwise.” A 1997 amendment to the law changed the provision to read: “If, after making a will, the testator is divorced or the testator’s marriage is annulled, all provisions in the will in favor of the testator’s former spouse . . . must be read as if the former spouse failed to survive the testator, and shall be null and void and of no effect unless the will expressly provides otherwise.” Tedder contended that the Legislature’s 1997 amendments governed all contingent bequests; that is, that the entire will should have been read “as if the former spouse failed to survive the testator.” But the Nashes contended that the amended �69 applies only to provisions that favor the former spouse. Because the contingent bequest to Tedder did not favor Marvin’s former spouse, the Nashes argued that the will must be construed as written. Vicki did not predecease Marvin, so the contingent bequest did not become operative, and the estate passed to Marvin’s heirs at law. The court stated that it agreed with the Nashes. Thus, the court found that �69 required that only those provisions in a will that favored a former spouse be read as if the spouse predeceased the testator. The contingent bequest to Tedder was not such a provision; thus, �69′s language did not govern the bequest. OPINION:Jefferson, C.J., delivered the opinion of the court.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 3 articles* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.