Youtor
In re Estate of Beale Case Brief Summary Law Case Explained
>> YOUR LINK HERE: ___ http://youtube.com/watch?v=DR-y-VWqSFA
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 42,100 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 988 casebooks ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o... • In re Estate of Beale, 113 N.W.2d 380 (1962) • For a will to be valid, a person must intend for it to be his final will when he executes it. What if someone executes a will and then marks it up a few hours later? Does that prove the person never actually intended the document to be his will? The Wisconsin Supreme Court explored this question in In re Estate of Beale. • Howard Beale lived in Wisconsin and had three minor sons. Beale had his secretary type a fourteen-page will that disinherited his youngest son, 10-year-old Thomas. • Beale flew to New York City, where he executed the will in front of several friends, with Beale and three witnesses signing the last page. That same day, either before or after the will was signed, Beale wrote a letter asking his secretary to make changes to two of the original will pages. These changes didn’t impact the distribution of Beale’s estate. Beale then flew to Moscow, and the secretary typed the two revised will pages. • After the trip, Beale asked his secretary to retype the revised will pages on a different typewriter so they would match the original will’s pages. Beale died shortly after that, before the revised pages were retyped. • The original will was submitted to probate. • Through a guardian ad litem, Thomas contested the will’s validity. If the will wasn’t valid, then under the laws of intestacy, Thomas would inherit part of his father’s estate. • Thomas claimed that Beale hadn’t intended for the original document to be his final will when he signed it, which was necessary for it to be a valid will. Instead, Beale had executed the will only to obtain the witnesses’ signatures, intending to swap out other parts of the will whenever he wanted. • As proof of this theory, Thomas pointed out that Beale had changed the original will’s pages either shortly before or shortly after signing it, which wasn’t consistent with intending for the original version to be his final will at that same time. Further, Beale had tried to match the new changes to the original pages, which was consistent with treating the original will as merely an interchangeable shell. • The probate court determined that Beale had intended the original will to be his final will when he executed it, that Beale had changed the two pages after the will was executed, that those changes weren’t effective, and that the original will was valid. Thomas appealed to the Wisconsin Supreme Court. • Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/in-re-e... • The Quimbee App features over 42,100 case briefs keyed to 988 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o... • Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/in-re-e... • Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here: • Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► https://www.youtube.com/subscription_... • Quimbee Case Brief App ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o... • Facebook ► / quimbeedotcom • Twitter ► / quimbeedotcom • #casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries
#############################
