Wills & Trusts

Modern Per Stirpes

Modern Approach: The estate is divided equally among the living and deceased at the first generation that has a living taker. Each member who is alive takes their share, and the shares of the deceased members drop to the next generation. This process is repeated for the next generations until every share is taken.

Acts of Independent Significance

A will may dispose of property by reference to acts and events, even though they are in the future and unattested, if they have significance apart from their effect on dispositions made by the will.

Harmless Error Doctrine

A writing, even if it does not meet the wills act formalities, is valid as a decedent's will if it is proven by clear and convincing evidence that the decedent intended the writing to be his/her will. (Pg. 181-194)

X, a small business owner, is owed a large sume of money by Y, who purchased items from X on credit and then declined to pay. X learns that Y is the sole heir of the recently deceased Z, who was quite wealthy. Some eight months after Z's death, Y disclaimed his entire interest in Z's estate. X wants to know if the assets of Z's estate are reachable by her as Y's creditor. Which of the following is the most accurate answer to X's question?

Probably not; for state law purposes, including those involving the rights of creditors, Y generally will be deemed to have predeceased Z.

KY Elective Share Statute

The KY elective share statute allows for an augmented pool (transfered intended to defeat the elective share - that is, illusory trusts). Then, the elective spouse gets 1/3 of the real estate and 1/2 of the personal property

Rule of Advancement ("Hotchpot")

The amount advanced is brought back into the estate "hotchpot." The total hotchpot, which now includes the advancement, is divided by the number of heirs receiving equal shares

Uniform Simultaneous Death Act (USDA)

an individual who is not established by clear and convincing evidence to have survived the other individual by 120 hours is deemed to have predeseased the other individual.

Decedent signs a will (Will 1) that devises her jewlry to her daughter and devises "all the rest and residue" of her property to her daughter and her son in equal shares. Two years later, Decedent signs another will (Will 2) that does not mention or expressly revoke Will 1 and does not mention her jewlry but devises her automobile to her son and devises "all the rest and residue" of her property to her daughter and her son in equal shares. Decedent dies without having executed another will, survived by her daughter and her son. Assuming both wills were validly executed, how will Decedent's estate be distributed?

Decedent's son will receive the car and the rest of the estate will be divided equally between the daughter and the son.

Strict Per Stirpes

Divides estate at the generation of children, whether or not any children were actually living at decedent's death Descendants of decedent's children take their parent's share "per stirpes" (only, of course, if their parents are deceased) Each surviving child receives one share, and the share of each deceased child passes to that child's descendants Unfair result if all of decedent's children are deceased, and each had different numbers of children (estate is not divided equally among grandchildren)

Dad dies intestate and unmarried, preceded in death by his 3 children, Arthur, Brenda, and Callie. 2 of Arthur's chlidren survive Dad (Doris and Edward), and one of Brenda's children survives Dad (Fran). Fran's child, Garth, survives Dad. Callie leaves no surviving children. How will Dad's intestate estate be distributed under the modern per stirpes method of representation?

Doris, Edward, and Fran each get 1/3rd

Decedent died intestate and unmarried in State L, survived by two children by his predeceased wife (E and F), and a son born out of wedlock, G. A statute in State L provides that a child born out of wedlock does not inherit from the child's father. Who gets how much of Decedent's estate?

E,F, and G share equally

Decedent died intestate with an estate valued at $800,000, leaving his children, X, Y, and Z as his heirs. A few months before his death, Decedent made a gift of $100,000 cash to his child, X. Under applicable law, the $100,000 gift is considered to be an advancement against X's inheritance. Who recieves what from Decedent's $800,000 estate?

Each of Y and Z receive $300,000, and X receives $200,000

Z convinces his mother-in-law, P, to put a provision in her will giving her house to Z by promising P that Z will pay K, P's son, a sum of money after P's death. Although at the time Z made the promise he fully intended to carry it out, he later changed his mind, and after P's death declined to pay K. Which of the following statements most accurately reflects the law that applies to these facts?

K has no probate cause of action against Z for fraud in the inducement, because Z did not intend to commit fraud at the time of the inducement.

Holographic Will Requirements

1. Writing (Testator's Writing) 2. Testator's Signature Does NOT need witnesses/attestations

Testator dies leaving a will that contains the following language: "I devise the residue of my estate to my friend F, for the benefit of my surviving children. F shall use this property to pay for my children's education, and shall distribute any remaining property in equal shares to my children at such time as my youngest living child reaches the age of twenty-five years." The will also contains a paragraph naming F as the executor of Testator's estate but contains no language that specifically names a trustee. Which of the following statements most accurately describes the effect of the quoted language in Testator's will?

(A) The language creates a trust with F as trustee and Testator's surviving children as beneficiaries. "for the benefit of" = intent of trust; "shall use" = F may use the property for their beneift in specific ways

Requirements of a Will

1. In writing 2. Signed by testator 3. (Attestation) Witnessed

Decedent dies intestate survived only by his child, C, and his grandchildren, X, Y, and Z. X is the child of Decedent's deceased child, A, and Y and Z are the children of Decedent's deceased child B. To whom will decedent's probate property be distributed if Decedent's jurisdiction of domicile follows the per capita at each generation (UPC) method of representation?

1/3 will be distributed to C and 2/9 will be distributed to each of X, Y, and Z.

Dad lives with Mom to raise their two children (A and B). A few years later, Dad divorces Mom and becomes estranged from A and B. Later Mom marries Husband, Dad gives up his parental rights, and Husband adopts A and B. Dad dies, and a few years later, Dad's mother (Grandma) dies intestate and unmarried. While Grandma's only descendants are A and B, she is also survived by her sister (Sister). Under the UPC, who inherits Grandma's estate.

A and B each inherit one-half of Grandma's estate. Under the majority rule, adopted children inherit through genetic parents if they were adopted by a stepparent. Under all intestacy statutes descendant inherit to the exclusion of collateral relatives.

Disclaimer

A beneficiary or heir may disclaim any interest that otherwise would pass to the person from the decedent or the decedent's estate, with the consequence that the interest passes as though the disclaiming party predeceased the decedent. Disclaimers are made primarily for tax reasons. Must be: 1.) in writing; 2.) irrevocable; and 3.) filed withing 9 months of the decedent's death

Elective Share

A minimum share of a deceased spouse's estate, which a surviving spouse may claim in lieu of any amount specified in the deceased spouse will. For example, a wife omitted from her husband's will may still claim an elective share of his estate.

Decedent dies unmarried and without children, survived only by her sister and four nieces and nephews. After Decedent's death, her sister searches Decedent's house and finds no witnessed will but does find a single piece of loose-leaf notebook paper that, in Decedent's handwriting, states as follows: "Upon my death, I would like all my property to be distributed to my survivng nieces and nephews." The document is signed by Decedent and dated approximately one year before Decedent's death. Decedent's jurisdiction does not recognize holographic wills. Which of the following most accurately describes the legal effect of the document?

Although the document is not witnessed, if Decedent's jurisdiction has enacted the harmless error doctrine it is valid if Decedent's intent that it be her will is established in a court proceeding by the requisite evidentiary standard.

L, an associate lawyer in a law firm, is asked by a senior partner to supervise the signing of the will of T, a very elderly person. Upon the commencement of a casual conversation with L, T shows considerable confusion as to simple things like the day of the week and current events. As the lawyer in charge of the execution conference, how should L proceed?

Among other questions, L should ask T to identify her close family members and loved ones

Joe dies intestate, in a majority rule jurisdiction, survived only by his siblings, Ann and Barry, and his half-sister, Karen. Who takes how much of Joe's estate?

Ann, Barry, and Karen take equal shares. In most jurisdictions, half-blood relations to the intestate decedent are treated as relations in the whole blood.

Ernestine executed a will in 2004 that gave all of her property to her best friends, Betty and Camilla, in equal shares. In 2016, she executed a new will that gave one-half of her property to her new boyfriend, Henry, and divided the rest between Betty and Camilla. She did not destroy the old will. In 2017, she broke up with Henry and tore up her 2016 will intending to revoke it and announced to Betty and Camilla that they would noe receive her estate under her 2004 will. She died in 2018 leaving her niece, Shannon, as her only relative. In a majority rule jurisdiction, who will receive Ernestine's probate estate?

Betty & Camilla, in equal shares. A will can be revoked by physical act, which involves an act on the paper will itself, such as destroying, tearing, crossing out, etc. coupled with the intent to revoke the will. Ernestine clearly revoked her 2016 will by phyiscal act. In a majority rule jurisdiction, if a testator revokes a will with the intention of revising the prior will, the prior will is revived. Here, Ernestine wished to revive her 2004 will by revoking her 2016 will, as she announced as much to her friends. Therefore, the 2004 will controls the disposition of her estate.

Izzy dies intestate and unmarried. Izzy had 4 children, Allen, Billie, Callie, and Debbie, but Allen and Billie predeceased Izzy while Callie and Debbie survived. Allen had 1 child, Esther who survives Izzy, and Billie had two children, FOrest and Greta, who survived Izzy. Debbie has one child, Harvey, who survives Izzy. How will Izzy's intestate estate be distributed under the strict per stirpes method of representation?

Callie and Debbie each get 1/4; Esther gets 1/4; Forest and Greta each get 1/8

Izzy dies intestate and unmarried. Izzy had four children, Allen, Billie, Callie, and Debbie, but Allen and Billie predeceased Izzy while Callie and Debbie survived. Allen had one child, Esther, who survives Izzy, and Billie had two children, Forest and Greta, who survive Izzy. Debbie has one child, Harvey, who survives Izzy. How will Izzy's intestate estate be distributed under the Uniform Probate Code's per capita at each generation method of representation?

Callie and Debbie each get one-fourth; Esther, Forest, and Greta each get one-sixth.

Per Capita at Each Generation

Each taker on any generational level is treated equally with the other takers on that level. Under the per capita at each generation (UPC) method, lines of descent are first counted beginning with the first generation to have a descendant surviving the decedent. Each surviving descendant in this generation is allocated one share, based on the number of lines of descent. The next step is what distinguishes this method from any other. In the next step, the remaining shares are combined, and from this combined amount shares are distributed to the next generation as though it is the first generation to survive the decedent. The process is repeated, if necessary, until all property is distributed.

H dies intestate, married to W. 3 years after the date of H's death, a child, Y, conceived by H's banked sperm, is born to W. What is likely to be Y's best legal argument for receiving a share of H's intestate estate?

H consented, in writing, to the banking of his sperm in anticipation of possible posthumous conception.

H died intestate and unmarried. H had three children, J, K, and L, but K predeceased him while J and L survived him. Also survivng H were his grandchildren: X, who is J's child; Y and Z, who are the children of K. L has no children. Who are H's heirs?

H's heirs consist only of J, L, Y, and Z

Mother marries Husband, who has two very young children (A and B) of a prior marriage that ended in divorce. Mother and Husband have two more children (C and D) and raise all four children together. Mother later dies intestate survived by Husband and her children and stepchildren. How will Mother's probate property be distributed?

Husband will receive a share, and then since stepchildren do not inherit, any remaining amount will be divided between C and D.

The decedent, a domiciliary of State X, a U.S. jurisdiction, dies intestate, leaving a husband, a child and a sister surviving her. Who will inherit the decedent's probate estate?

In all U.S. jurisdictions, the decedent's husband will inherit all or a portion of the decedent's estate, and the decedent's child will inherit the remaining portion, if any.

pretermitted heir

In either a will or trust, a lawful heir who is neither provided for nor specifically disinherited. Heir will have claim to share of estate as though decedent had died intestate

Testator, a widow, died at age 93 leaving a will that devised the bulk of her property to her next-door neighbor (Neighbor). By the time of her death Testator had lived alone in a small house since her husband died seven years before, and her health had been in decline for the last four years. Although Testator left a daughter (Daughter) surviving her with whom she maintained a close relationship, Daughter lived two hundred miles from Testator in another state. Daughter, who visited Testator whenever she could and spoke to her by telephone a few times per week, had been urging Testator to move in with her in recent years. But Testator, who was known to be very independent, had refused, maintaining that she was capable of caring for herself. Daughter is very surprised to learn of Testator's will, which was signed less than one year before Testator's death and revoked Testator's longstanding will, as Testator told her shortly after Testator's husband (Daughter's father) died that Daughter would receive everything when Testator died. Daughter suspects that Testator's neighbor may have unduly pressured Testator to change her will to leave most of her estate to the neighbor. If Daughter brings an action against Neighbor for undue influence, which of the following facts, if proven, would be most likely to shift the burden of proof to Neighbor?

Neighbor had been named as Testator's attorney-in-fact under a power of attorney signed by Testator.

L, a lawyer, drafted a will for X, under which X devised all of her assets to her granddaughter, G. After X signed the will in L's office, L offered to keep X's will in his "fire-proof safe" but X declined and opted to take the original document with her. L never heard from X again. After X died, G could find among X's possessions only a photocopy of the will. G talked with everyone who knew X, and none of them recalled X ever discussing her will with them. Is the will that L drafted for X in effect to dispose of X's estate at her death?

No, it will be presumed that X revoked her will. This presumption is rebuttable only by evidencee that the will was lost or destroyed other than by a revocatory act on behalf of the testator.

G's mother dies intestate with a large estate, leaving only G and G's sole child C surviving her. While G's mother's estate is being settled, G is involved in an auto accident that is determined to be his fault. The driver of the other car files a state law negligence action in court against G, asking for in excess of $1 million in damages. G, who is underinsured and has few assets, decides to file a timely disclaimer with respect to his entire interest in his mother's estate. Will G's interest in his mother's estate be available to satisfy any judgement in the case against G?

No, since G has filed a timely disclaimer of his interest in his mother's estate, he will be deemed to have predeceased his mother for purposes of state law, and the estate will be distributed to C free of any claims of G's creditors.

T is the trustee of the "O Trust," an irrevocable trust created by O and funded with several million dollars. T has mismanaged his personal funds (property owned by T outside of the O Trust), and one of T's personal creditors obtains a judgement against him. If T's personal assets are insufficient to satisfy the judgement against him, can T's judgement creditor seek satisfaction of the judgement against the assets of the O Trust?

No. because T has legal title to the trust property only in his capacity as trustee.

H and W are married to one another but each has children from a prior marriage. They go to a lawyer and have mutual wills drawn up. H's will provides that if W survives him, then she will receive all of his estate, but if W does not survive him, then his estate will be distributed in equal shares among the children of H and the children of W. W's will provides that if H survives her, then he will receive all of W's estate, but if H does not survive her, then her estate will be distributed in equal shares among the children of W and the children of H. H dies first with his will intact, then W changes her will to provide that her estate will be distributed only to her own children. After W dies, H's son, S, brings an action against W's estate contending that W breached a contract with H not to revoke her will. Which of the following most accurately describes the legal status of S's claim for breach of contract?

S's claim is valid, if he satisfies the evidentiary burden for proving that contract not to revoke existed

Dad, a widower, and his only child (Son) are riding in a car together when they are involved in a tragic collision with another car. Dad is killed instantly, survived only by Son and Son's child (Dad's grandson), Grandson. Two days after Dad's death Son dies from his injuries. Dad has no will, but Son has a will that leaves everything to his wife. Assuming the current version of the USDA is in effect in Dad's jurisdiction, what will happen to Dad's probate property?

Since Son did not survive Dad by 120 hours, all of Dad's property will be distributed to Grandson. Grandson = Dad's only intestate heir, therefore inherits all of Dad's estate.

OH Elective Share Statute

So long as the spouse has a child: probate only; spouse may take 1/2 of the net estate unles 2 kids than 1/3

A will executed in year one by T contains the following dispositive provisions: "I hereby give the sum of $100,000 to my best friend, X. I give the remainder of my estate to the American Red Cross." When T dies in October of year two, her original will is found among her possessions, but the line giving X $100,000 has been crossed out and initialed by T, beside which a date is written as "March 1, [year two]." The will is not further disturbed or modified. Which of the following best describes the legal effect of the crossed-out line on the will?

Some jurisdictions permit partial revocation by physical act; in any such jurisdiction X would not received the $100,00 devise if T crossed out the provision with a intent to revoke the devise to X

Conscious Presence Test

Some states require only that the witnesses and/or the testator through either sight, hearing, or general consciousness of events, be aware that the witness is in the act of signing the will.

T, who was very elderly and frail, died leaving a will that gave all of her vast estate to X, her caretaker, who was of no relation to T. T left a number of close relatives surviving her. Of the following factors that can be proven by the challenger to T's will, which is least relevant in determining whether X unduly influenced T?

T drove a $100,000 automobile. It is not suspicious that a testator with a "vast estate" might drive an expensive automobile

Doctrine of Incorporation by Reference

Under the doctrine of incorporation by reference, an extrinsic document not present at the time the will was executed may be probated as part of the will if it was in existence when the will was executed, the will sufficiently describes the document, and the will manifests an intent to incorporate the document.

In year 1 T downloads a will form from the internet and uses it to type up a will for himself devising $100,000 to his best friend and the rest of his estate to his nephew. T then prints out and signs the document but forgets to have it witnessed. A couple of years later T develops a serious relationship with his girlfriend and decides to amend his will. He downloads a codicil form from the internet and uses it to create a codicil to his year 1 will that devises his house to his girlfriend. T takes the codicil to a local coffee shop where he signs it and has it witnessed according to the laws of his jurisdiction. A couple of days later T dies unexpectedly. Which of the following is the most likely disposition of T's probate estate?

T's house will be distributed to his girlfriend, $100,00 will be distributed to his best friend and the rest of his estate will be distributed to his nephew. Although the unwitnessed will was potentially invalid when executed the codicil was validly executed and the will is treated as republished by the codicil and thereby rendered valid. (Pg. 251-252)

T, who was very wealthy, died at a very advanced age. T's will left all of her considerable estate to her gardener, G. X, T's nephew and sole intestate heir, challenged T's will on the basis that T suffered from an insane delusion. X brought forth witnesses who testified that T was convinced that X was a regular participant in televised poker tournaments. In fact, X merely bore a resemblance to a certain famous poker player. X's witnesses further testified that T persisted in this belief despite being presented with overwhelming evidence that X did not play poker. X offered further evidence that T was of the opinion that gamblers were reprehensible. Among the following, what is the most valuable testimony offered by the proponent of the will in defense of X's lawsuit?

Testimony of T's friends that indicated T thought X was undeserving of T's wealth because X stood to inherit a great deal of money from his elderly aunt

T, who has three children and an estate in excess of $2 million, executes a will that gives 40% of his estate to his son, X, 40% to his daughter, Y, and 20% to his son, Z. A provision in T's will provides that anyone who contests the will is to receive, in lieu of the foregoing percentage of his estate, the sum of $100. Z thinks that X and Y unduly influenced T and wishes to challenge the will. However, he wants to know the effect of the "$100 clause." Which of the following is the most accurate characterization of the legal effect of the clause in T's will providing that anyone who challenges T's will is to receive only $100?

The court will probably not enforce it even if Z loses his suit, unless the court finds that Z did not have "probable cause" for the challenge

The decedent dies survived by first cousin, a great uncle, and a second cousin. If the decedent's jurisdiction of domicile follows a parentelic system of intestate succession, who will succeed to the decedent's probate property, according to a table of consanguinity?

The first cousin will receive the entire estate

"Bifurcation of Title"

The idea that a trustee has legal title to trust property in his capacity as trustee, while the trust beneficiaries are said to have equitable or beneficial title. Although a trustee's legal title to a trust allows him to deal with those assets as an owner, he may do so only in his capacity as trustee

T's will devises his residuary estate to "the trustee of the trust created under this will." T includes language in the will directing the creation and administration of the trust but inadvertently fails to name a trustee. Which of the following is the most accurate statement of the legal effect of the trust provisions in T's will?

The trust will be created and the court will appoint a trustee

Lawyer, who is just starting out in practice and has no employees, prepares to conduct her first will execution ceremony. She contracts with a local notary to appear at the signing but is unable to find a witness. When the testator shows up accompanied by her adult daughter, Lawyer persuades to daughter to serve as a witness. Lawyer then proceeds with the will execution, with Lawyer and the testator's daughter (Daughter) serving as witnesses and the notary providing appropriate notarial services. Assuming the will was properly executed by all of the parties, but the jurisdiction has a purging statute, which of the following is likely to be the most accurate description of the legal effect of Daughter serving an attesting witness?

The will is likely to be valid, but Daughter may be required to purge any beneficial interest she might otherwise receive under the will.

Purging Statute

Will attested to by an interested witness is valid, but witness gets nothing (or the lesser of the will versus intestacy). Only applies if witness is necessaryif more than enough witnesses without him, he is OK.

Lawyer, who is just starting out in practice and has no employees, prepares to conduct her first will execution ceremony. She persuades two workers from a neighboring accounting firm to be witnesses, but she is unable to procure a notary. Nonetheless, she decides to proceed with the will execution, and the testator and the two witnesses assemble in Lawyer's office and sign and witness the will according to the statutory requirements. Because there is no notary, however, Lawyer omits the attestation clause and the self-proving affidavit. Which of the following best describes the legal validity of the will?

The will is likely valid because neither an attestation clause nor a self-proving affidavit are necessary for a valid will

You are approached by X, whose father, T, recently died. It seems that T executed a will one month before his death that devised to X, his only son, about $10,000, and devised the rest of his $500,000 estate to Charity, a public charity. T's will, which named T's sister as executor, was recently admitted to probate. X tells you that his father suffered from dementia, and as many as six months before his death was unable to understand what kind of property he owned and how much of it he owned. X wants to know what is required to win a lawsuit based on lack of capacity to execute a will. Given X's concerns, which of the following is good legal advice to X?

The will, having been admitted to probate, is prima facie valid; X must produce sufficient evidence to prove lack of capacity to execute a will.

Decedent dies at an advanced age after a long and happy life. Decedent leaves behind a great deal of property located in the jurisdiction where she was domiciled at her death. Decedent is survived by many close relatives but, after a through and diligent search, no will of Decedent's is found nor is there any evidence that Decedent ever had a will. Who succeeds to the ownership of Decedent's probate property?

Those persons described in the intestacy statutes enacted in the state of Decedent's domicile

Requirements to create a trust

To create a trust, one need only the requisite intent, one or more trust beneficiaries, and trust property. The intent necessary to create a trust is the intent that the property given be held or managed for the benefit of one or more persons.

At Testator's death after a long illness a formal attested will that he executed a few days before is filed with the probate court in testator's jurisdiction. The will is properly executed in all respects and also contains a properly notarized self-proving affidavit. Despite that Testator, a widower, left three adult children surviving him, his will devises all of his property to his caretaker. Child, one of testator's children, challenges the will on the basis that Testator lacked testamentary capacity. Child is prepared to present credible written evidence and expert testimony regarding two points. First, in addition to Testator's many physical ailments that rendered him bound to a wheelchair, Testator was diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease (a neurological disorder that causes dementia) approximately six months before his death. Second, although Testator had been an active investor most of his life, at his will signing ceremony he was unable to recall all of the various companies in which he owned stock. Which of the following is the most accurate statement regarding Testator's legal capacity to execute the will?

Under the facts presented, it is unclear whether Testator had the requisite legal capacity to make a will

Exception to Incorporation by Reference Requirements

Under the general common law rule, a document cannot be incorporated by reference into a will unless the document is in existence at the date the will is executed. However, a majority of jurisdictions has an exception to this rule for items of tangible personal property only. The UPC provides that a separate list prepared before or after execution of the will can dispose of items of tangible personal property if referred to by the will and signed by the testator.

Majority Rule - stepchildren

Under the majority rule, stepchildren do not inherit, so, after the surviving spouse's share is carved, out the remaining amounts, if any, is distributed to the decedent's descendants, by representation.

In year one, T executes a valid will that gives all of her property to X. In year two, T executes a valid will that makes no reference to any earlier will or wills, but whose only dispositive provision gives T's diamond ring to Y, and does not mention the rest of her property. If T takes no further actions, how will her property be distributed at her death?

Y will get the diamond ring and X will receive the rest of T's property. Although a will can be revoked by a subsequent will, if the subsequent will does not explicitly revoke the prior will and does not dispose of all of a decedent's property, it will be deemed to revoke the prior will only to the extent that its provisions are inconsistent with the prior will. In such case the subsequent will is deemed to be a codicil of the prior will. Since the year two will only disposed of the diamon ring and not all of T's property, it will be deemed a codicil to the year one will.

S writes the following on the back of a lottery ticket: "This is my will. I give all my property to X. [signed and dated] S." S later dies. Can the writing be probated as S's will?

Yes, if S lives in a state where holographic wills are recognized.

L, a lawyer in State J, prepared and presided over the signing by T of T's will in L's office. State J requires that the witnesses sign the will in the presence of the testator and in the presence of one another. L, T, W1, and W2. W1 then signed the will as a witness, after which T stepped just outside the room briefly to send a private text message on his cell phone, leaving the door ajar so he could hear the proceedings. During T's absence from the room, W2 signed as a witness. T came back into the room, whereupon L announced the signing was complete and dismisses the witnesses. Was the will validly executed?

Yes, if the jurisdiction recognizes the "conscious presence" test

M directs N to write the following on a piece of paper: "This is my will. I give all my property to X." N writes it out, dates it, and M signs it. M later dies. Can the paper writing be probated as M's will?

Yes, under a "harmless error" statute if the evidentiary standard is met A harmless error statute generally provides that a writing is valid as the will of a person if the proponent of the will provides clear and convincing evidence that the person intended the document to be his or her will.

T died with a will that included the following provision: "I may leave a separate list signed and dated by me and disposing of all or a portion of my tangible personl property. This list may be executed before, concurrent with, or subsequent to the execution of my will. If my executor finds such a list within 30 days after the date of my death, then it is my intent that such list have testamentary effect." At T's death her executor finds, with T's will, a list signed by T and dated 2 years after the date of her will that purports to give her bicycle (valued at $500) to her friend, F. Does the list have legal effect?

Yes; a majority of states have adopted a statute that allows a separate list referred to in the will to dispose of tangible personal property