Wills Final

W executes a will that gives her entire estate to her husband, H, if he survives her, and if not, then to her child, X. W also designates H as the primary death beneficiary of her employer-sponsored qualified pension plan, and X as the contingent beneficiary in case H predeceases W. Subsequently W divorces H. W fails to change her will or the beneficiary designation on her pension plan. W does not remarry and subsequently dies. Who is entitled to the death benefits from W's pension plan?

H, unless the pension plan documentation provides for a different disposition upon divorce

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.

H, who stood to inherit from his wife, W, is accused of killing her. Though W is clearly dead, H contends that her death was not caused by his hand. In support of his position, H points to the fact that he was acquitted of the murder of W in a criminal trial. He is then sued by W's children for wrongful death and is found to have feloniously and intentionally brought about W's death. Can H inherit from W?

No, because he was found liable in the civil trial and is therefore prohibited from inheriting by the slayer rule

In year one, T, who is very wealthy, executes a will with only the following dispositive provisions: "I give the sum of $100,000 to my boyfriend, X. I give all the rest of my estate to my daughter, Z." No other references to X are made in the will, nor is the possibility of T getting married. In year two, T and X get married. Despite advice to the contrary from her lawyer, T does not enter into a premarital agreement with X. In year three, T dies, survived by both X and Z with the year one will intact. T's probate estate is valued at several million dollars. To what portion of T's probate estate are X and Z entitled in most jurisdictions?

Although X was mentioned in the will, the possibility of marriage was not, therefore the pretermitted spouse rule would apply and the will would be deemed revoked as to X's share of the estate. X would therefore be entitled to receive an intestate share of T's estate, and Z would receive the residue.

Client wishes to transfer his principal residence to his girlfriend at his death outside of probate. He is not interested in obtaining advice as to the transfer of any other assets. He consults with Lawyer as to the simplest and easiest way to make this transfer. Of the following, which is the best advice given to Client by Lawyer?

Client should sign and record a deed under which he transfers the property to himself, with a "transfer on death" to his girlfriend.

H died intestate and unmarried. H had three children, J, K, and L, but K predeceased him, while J and L survived him. Also surviving 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.

X prepared his will from a form he downloaded from the Internet. The will contained no self-proving affidavit. He printed it out on his computer and took it to a local coffee shop. Once at the coffee shop, he signed his name at the end of the document in the presence of two witnesses after announcing to them that it was his will. Both witnesses then attested the will by signing below his signature in his presence and the presence of one another. Which of the following statements is likely to be the most accurate statement of the law with respect to these facts?

The will is validly executed.

The only will T ever executed leaves $100,000 to her favorite nephew and divides the rest of her probate estate between her two children. The will is witnessed by T's daughter and T's neighbor. T dies. Assuming T's jurisdiction has a majority-rule purging statute, how will T's probate estate be distributed?

$100,000 to the nephew and the rest divided between the children.

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.

Decedent dies intestate, survived only by his child, C, and his grandchildren, W, X, Y, and Z. W is the child of Decedent's deceased child, A, X, and Y are the children of Decedent's deceased child B, and Z is the child of Decedent's surviving child C. To whom will decedent's probate property be distributed if Decedent's jurisdiction of domicile follows the modern per stirpes method of representation?

1/3 will be distributed to C, 1/3 will be distributed to W, and 1/6 will be distributed to each of X and Y.

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.

O creates a revocable trust by executing a declaration of trust. On the same day, O also executes a "pour-over" will. The trust instrument provides that the trustee is to distribute all of the net income to O during her lifetime, together with so much of the principal as requested by O from time to time. At O's death, any remaining trust property is to be distributed to O's daughter, Q. A provision in the trust instrument states as follows: "The settlor reserves the right to revoke the trust at any time by a writing delivered to the trustee." A few months after creation of the trust, O has a falling out with Q. O tears up the trust instrument and signs a new will giving all of her estate to the local animal shelter. Upon O's death a few months later, Q brings suit against O's estate contending that O did not properly revoke her trust and that all of the property transferred thereto must therefore be distributed to Q. No writing by O purporting to revoke the trust is ever found. Which of the following is the estate's best legal argument against Q's contentions?

A revocable trust can be revoked in any manner that indicates the settlor's intention to do so, unless the trust instrument provides that a method of revocation in the trust instrument is exclusive.

Testator signs a will that devises $100,000 to A, Testator's extensive coin collection (worth about $100,000) to B, and the residue of her estate to C. A few years later, Testator sells her coin collection and invests the proceeds in a couple of antique collector cars. In the next several years, Testator uses most of her cash for investments in real estate and securities. When Testator dies many years later never having changed her will, her estate consists of the antique collector cars, several parcels of real estate, and about $20,000 in cash. To what, if anything are A, B, and C entitled from Testator's estate?

A will get $100,000 in cash (assets can be sold by the executor to produce the cash), B will get nothing, and C will get the rest of the 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 of my property to be distributed to my surviving 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.

O signs a declaration of trust creating the "O Revocable Trust," under which O will serve as trustee. The trust instrument provides that only O will benefit from the trust during her lifetime and at O's death any remaining trust property will be distributed in equal shares to O's children. O retains the right to revoke and amend the trust. On the same day O signs a will whose residuary clause devises the residue of O's estate to "the trustee of the O Revocable Trust." O then signs and records a deed transferring her primary residence to "O, as trustee of the O Revocable Trust." When O dies a few months later her property consists of the residence she transferred to the trust, a checking and savings account, and some miscellaneous tangible personal property. Will O's estate avoid probate?

Although the primary residence will avoid probate, the other assets will avoid probate only if she transferred them to the trust or held them in some other nonprobate form at her death.

The decedent dies intestate, survived by her biological child, Alvin, her adopted child, Boris, and her stepchild, Camelia. Who will inherit the decedent's estate?

Alvin and Boris only, in equal shares

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.

T dies leaving a will that contains only the following dispositive provisions: "I give the sum of $100,000 to my beloved son, S, if S survives me. I give all the rest of my estate to my dear friend, F, if F survives me." S predeceased T but left descendants surviving T. F survived T. Assuming the jurisdiction of T's domicile is a majority rule jurisdiction, who gets the $100,000?

Because the devise was to pass to S only "if S survives" T, it passes to F under the residuary clause of T's will.

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 now 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 and Camilla, in equal shares.

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 strict per stirpes method of representation?

Callie and Debbie each get one-fourth; Esther gets one-fourth; Forest and Greta each get one-eighth.

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.

Testator died after a long life leaving behind a large estate and a recently executed codicil to her will that divided her estate between only two of her three adult children. Before its modification by the codicil, Testator's will had divided her estate equally among all of her children. Child 3, who was cut out of Testator's will by the codicil, brought a lawsuit against Testator's estate alleging that Testator suffered from an insane delusion, as she thought that the U.S. Congress was, since an alleged UFO sighting two years before, secretly comprised of malicious extraterrestrial beings masquerading as human congresspeople. Despite numerous efforts by many friends and family members to disabuse Testator of this notion, she continued to believe it was the truth. Which of the following facts, if proven, would be most favorable to Child 3 in his lawsuit?

Child 3 was a U.S. Senator.

Decedent signs a will (Will 1) that devises her jewelry 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 jewelry 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.

Dad dies intestate and unmarried, preceded in death by his three children, Arthur, Brenda, and Callie. Two of Arthur's children 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 one-third.

H, who is married to W, executes a declaration of revocable trust and transfers most of his assets to the trust. On the same date, H executes a will that names the trustee of H's revocable trust as the beneficiary of H's residuary estate. The revocable trust provides that if W survives H, then she will benefit from the trust assets after H's death. A couple of years later, H and W divorce. Shortly thereafter, H dies unexpectedly, not having made any changes to his revocable trust instrument. Which of the following most accurately describes W's interest in H's revocable trust upon H's death?

Due to the divorce, in many jurisdictions W will be deemed to have predeceased H for purposes of determining her benefit from the revocable trust.

Decedent dies intestate, survived by his children, E, F, and G. Subsequently, F, who has two children of his own, disclaims all of his interest in Decedent's estate in accordance with the applicable disclaimer statute. Who will receive Decedent's probate estate?

E and G will each receive one-third of Decedent's estate, and F's descendants will receive the remaining one-third.

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.

At T's death his will leaves his residuary estate "in equal shares to my nieces." T's only sibling had four daughters: E and F, who are still alive; G, who died after T executed his will but before T's death, leaving a son, X, but whose will left all of her estate to the American Red Cross; and H, who died childless before T's death, with a will leaving all of her property to her husband, Y. In a majority rule jurisdiction, how will T's estate be distributed?

E, F, and X will receive T's residuary estate in equal shares.

T died on February 22, 2016, and T's probate estate was opened on April 1, 2016. F was appointed personal representative of T's estate. On May 8, 2016, F published proper notices of T's death and the commencement of probate proceedings in the local newspaper, as directed by the probate jurisdiction's nonclaim statute. The notices, as required by the statute, also contained a statement that creditors' claims against T's estate that were not filed on or before September 8, 2016, would be barred. On September 15, 2016, Empathic Elder Services, Inc. ("EES"), a local health care services company, filed a claim against T's estate for $5,000 for services rendered in the six weeks preceding T's death. Although F was aware that EES had provided services to T shortly before T's death, F objected to the claim, taking the position that the state's nonclaim statute barred the claim, as it was filed after September 8, 2016. What is the best argument for the validity of EES's claim?

EES was a reasonably ascertainable creditor, was not aware of the probate proceedings, and did not receive actual notice that the nonclaim statute had begun to run.

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 receives what from Decedent's $800,000 estate?

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

H dies intestate, married to W. Three 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.

Testator wishes to make some major revisions to her will and makes an appointment with her lawyer to do so. In the meantime, concerned that she may die before completing the legal revision process, she writes the following in the bottom footer of the first page of the will: "This will is hereby revoked, as my intent is to sign a new will to be prepared by my lawyer." Testator signs and writes in the date below this language. None of Testator's writing actually touches any of the words of the will. As it happens, Testator passes away on the eve of her appointment with her lawyer, and so never completes the process of executing a new will. The will with Testator's writing in the footer is found among her possessions after her death. Which of the following statements best describes the legal effect of the will?

Even if Testator's jurisdiction does not recognize holographic wills, the will may be deemed to have been revoked, because some jurisdictions do not require that a revocation by physical act touch the words of the will.

T dies with a will containing a general devise as follows: "I give the sum of one million dollars ($100,000) to my best friend, F." Which of the following is the best argument for resorting to extrinsic evidence to resolve the ambiguity contained in this devise?

Extrinsic evidence should be admissible to resolve any ambiguity, be it patent or latent.

Decedent dies intestate survived by his wife, M, and their two minor children, F and G. At Decedent's death, M was one month pregnant with the couple's third child, H. The intestacy statutes in Decedent's jurisdiction provide that after a share for the surviving spouse, if any, is set aside, Decedent's descendants receive the remainder of the decedent's estate. How will the descendants' portion of Decedent's estate be distributed under the intestacy statute?

F and G will receive an equal share, and H, if born alive, will also receive an equal share.

Testator signs a will prepared by his lawyer that leaves his entire estate to his wife. Unfortunately, no provision is made in the will for the possibility that Testator's wife might predecease him, an event that occurs a few years later. Testator's death shortly follows that of his wife. After Testator's death, his niece (Niece) files his will with the probate court along with a petition to have the will reformed pursuant to the Uniform Probate Code's provision on reformation of governing instruments to correct mistakes, which has been adopted in Testator's jurisdiction. Niece is prepared to offer evidence that Testator instructed his lawyer to draft the will to provide that if Testator's wife predeceased him his estate would be devised to Niece, but the lawyer left the provision out by mistake. Which of the following statements best describes the law as it is likely to apply to Niece's petition?

If Niece's evidence is clear and convincing then the will should be reformed to provide that the estate is devised to Niece.

M recently died, leaving a valid will, executed a few years before her death, that devised her substantial estate in equal shares to her two children, F and G. At the time that M executed her will, she also executed a durable power of attorney naming her child G as her attorney-in-fact and giving her very broad powers. A few months after signing these documents, M began to suffer cognitive impairment. Later, G, as M's attorney-in-fact under the durable power of attorney, made several cash gifts to various persons from M's accounts. Before M died, G, as M's attorney-in-fact, also settled an inter vivos trust on M's behalf and transferred several valuable assets to the trust. Did G have the authority to make the gifts and settle the trust?

If the durable power of attorney did not contain specific authorization to make the gifts and create the trusts, then neither of those actions was permitted.

Having as one of her goals the avoidance of probate, O executes a declaration of trust creating a revocable trust and also executes a pour-over will and a durable power of attorney. The revocable trust benefits O during her lifetime and at O's death the assets are to be distributed to O's children. The durable power of attorney names O's daughter (D) as O's attorney-in-fact and gives D broad powers to act on behalf of O. The trust instrument names D as the successor trustee in the event of O's incapacity (as defined in the trust instrument) or death. O begins the process of transferring her assets to the trust but only gets some of them transferred before she becomes ill and is forced to stop the process. A few months later O's family determines that she has met the definition of incapacity contained in the trust instrument and D becomes trustee of the trust with O's acquiescence. Which of the following is the best advice to D regarding her desire to manage O's assets for O's benefit while O remains incapacitated and preserve O's goal of avoiding probate at her death?

If the durable power of attorney permits it then D should, as O's attorney-in-fact, transfer O's remaining assets to D as trustee of the revocable trust so that D as trustee can manage all of O's assets for O's benefit while she remains incapacitated.

T, who lived in a jurisdiction that has adopted all the UPC antilapse provisions, dies leaving a will that, among other provisions, contains language that states as follows: "I give and bequeath the sum of $100,000 to X, if X survives me. I give, devise and bequeath all the rest and residue of my estate in equal shares to those of E, F, and G who survive me." X, who was T's son, predeceased T leaving X's children, J and K, surviving. Since X predeceased T, to whom will the $100,000 general devise be distributed?

If the will contains no additional indication that T intended X's general devise to lapse in the event he predeceased T, then J and K will receive the $100,000 general devise.

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.

Testator dies with a will that, among other dispositions, devises the sum of $100,000 to "my friend, F" and devises the residue of the estate to his nephew. Although Testator's nephew survives him, F does not, and the will contains no direction as to what should be done about any lapsed devises. What will happen to the $100,000 devise to F?

It will go to Testator's nephew.

O, who owns much valuable real property, has two adult children who are constantly falling in and out of her favor. When O gets angry at one of her children, she often decides to eliminate or reduce the amount of her estate she gives the child under her will. But O is tired of paying a lawyer to draft a new will or codicil each time this happens. She therefore comes up with an idea expressed in the following will provision: "I give and devise my real property as follows: a) Any parcels upon which a blue flag is erected at my death I give to my son, X; and b) Any parcels upon which a red flag is erected at my death I give to my daughter, Y." Now if O is angry at her son, for example, she can remove the blue flag from various parcels and erect a red flag instead. What is the legal effect of this idea?

It will not have legal effect due to the doctrine of "acts of independent significance."

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.

H and W are married to one another in a first marriage for both and have two children of the marriage. Neither has other children. They go to see a lawyer, L, for estate planning. L's initial conversation with H and W reveals that each of H and W wants the other to receive the decedent's entire estate, if the other spouse survives. Each wants the children to have the entire estate of the decedent, in equal shares, if there is no surviving spouse. Although L is concerned about potential conflicts of interest, she believes she is capable of ethically representing both clients at the same time. L then explains to H and W the potential conflicts of interest that might arise, and each client gives informed consent to the representation, in writing. L then sets about preparing wills for each of H and W that are intended to accomplish the goals outlined above. H subsequently calls L and tells her that he wishes L to arrange for some of his estate to be left to "a friend," but that W should not be informed of this. Which of the following best describes L's ethical considerations upon receiving H's request?

L must withdraw from representation and must also reveal the substance of H's request to W, but only if both clients consented to L informing the other client of all information that comes to L's attention that might affect the other client's decisions regarding the representation.

T dies with a will devising "all of my estate, including all of my property of every kind and character, all life insurance proceeds and the remaining benefits in any retirement account, to my niece, N." At T's death she owns a number of probate assets, a life insurance policy under which she is the insured, and an individual retirement account (IRA). To what property is N entitled?

N is entitled to the probate assets, but the facts are insufficient to determine whether she is entitled to the life insurance proceeds or IRA benefits.

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.

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 judgment against him. If T's personal assets are insufficient to satisfy the judgment against him, can T's judgment creditor seek satisfaction of the judgment against the assets of the O Trust?

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

T executes a will while his son, H, is married to W, a devout Catholic. T's will devises his estate in equal shares to his three adult sons, including H. T's will further provides that "in the event my son, H, is still married to a person who is not of the Jewish faith at my death, he shall forfeit his share which shall instead be divided between his brothers." At T's death with the will intact, H remains married to W. Will the quoted language in T's will be respected?

No, because the quoted language is intended to or would tend to disrupt a family relationship

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.

S, who is getting up in years, executes a deed of trust creating the "S Revocable Trust" under which T is the trustee. S then transfers most of his property to T as trustee of the trust, including Blackacre, a parcel of rental real estate managed by S and his oldest child A. The trust instrument provides that all of the trust's property is held for the benefit of S during his lifetime and that at S's death all remaining trust property is to be distributed in equal shares to S's two children, A and B. Approximately one year after the transfer of Blackacre to the trust, S decides to sell Blackacre to his oldest child, A. A transfers cash and a promissory note directly to S, and S directs T to deed Blackacre to A, free and clear of the trust. T complies with S's request. S's child B, upset that S sold Blackacre to A for what she considers a bargain price, brings suit against T, as trustee of the trust, alleging breach of her fiduciary duty. If the jurisdiction follows the rules set out in the Uniform Trust Code, will B's suit be successful?

No, if S still had the right to revoke the trust during the time period when the sale was made.

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.

H and W, a married couple, are each in their second marriage, and both have children from a prior marriage. They do not have children of their marriage. H executes a will that devises all of his estate to W if she survives him and divides his estate equally among his children and W's children if W does not survive him. W executes a will that devises all of her estate to H if he survives her and divides her estate equally among her children and H's children if H does not survive her. A few years later H dies having not revoked his will and his estate goes to W, who survives him. When W subsequently dies H's children discover that she executed a new will after H's death devising all of her estate to her own children. Do H's children have any legal recourse against W's estate for being left out of her will?

No, not unless the parties entered into a contract not to revoke their wills, which is not evident from the facts.

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 judgment 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.

W marries H, a widower who has a young child, X, from his first marriage. W and H's marriage produces two children, O and P. Although W never adopts X, the couple raises all three children together. H later dies. Some years later, W, who never remarried, dies intestate, survived only by O, P, and X. Who inherits W's estate?

O and P will each receive a one-half share, while X will not inherit.

O signs a document that purports to create the "O Trust" and declares herself to be the trustee of the trust. The document provides that the trustee of the O Trust shall pay the income of the trust to O for her lifetime, and that, at O's death, the trust property shall be distributed to O's daughter, M. O then opens a bank account as "O, as trustee of the O Trust." Which of the following best describes the legal effect of O's actions?

O has created the O Trust.

Testator dies with a will that distributes the residue of her estate "in equal shares to my grandchildren." Although at the time of the execution of the will Testator had four grandchildren, (A, B, C, and D), Testator's granddaughter A predeceased Testator leaving descendants surviving Testator. B, C, and D all survived Testator. How will the residue of Testator's estate be distributed?

One equal share will be distributed to each of B, C, and D, and one equal share will be distributed to A's descendants.

X, a small business owner, is owed a large sum 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.

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 a contract not to revoke existed.

T is elderly, unmarried, and has no children. She has very few assets other than her home, which she wants to leave to her niece, N, at her death. T also wants to avoid probate, maintain exclusive control over her estate during her lifetime, and be able to sell the house in the future if she no longer wishes to live there. One of her friends advised her to sign a deed transferring a remainder interest in her home to N, and retaining a life estate. Another friend told her to sign a deed transferring the home to herself and N as joint tenants. A third friend told her to execute a beneficiary deed naming N as the beneficiary of the home. A fourth friend told T to execute a will that devises the home to N. In light of T's goals, what action should T take?

She should execute a beneficiary deed naming N as the beneficiary.

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 Uniform Simultaneous Death Act 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

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 receive the $100,000 devise if T crossed out the provision with an intent to revoke the devise to X.

Testator, who has assets worth about $2 million, has two children (Son and Daughter) and wishes to treat them equally and also wishes to make a testamentary gift to his favorite charity. Testator owns a portfolio of securities in a brokerage account, a small apartment building and other miscellaneous assets. Testator signs a will devising $500,000 to Son, the apartment building (worth about $500,000) to Daughter, and the residue of his estate to charity. Testator subsequently becomes ill, has to quit his job, and ends up spending a great deal of his estate on expensive treatments. In the meantime, many of Testator's investments decline in value. At Testator's death his estate consists of about $250,000 in cash and other assets and the apartment building (now worth about $750,000). Given the provisions of Testator's will, who is entitled to what from his estate?

Son gets the remaining cash, Daughter gets the apartment building, and charity gets nothing.

T executed a will containing only the following dispositive provision: "I give all of my estate to my dear wife, W." A few years later T's wife W died, survived by T. T did not thereafter change his will and died with it intact. T's nephew, N, who would inherit T's estate under the state's intestacy statutes, was named T's personal representative. T's best friend, F, filed a petition in the probate proceedings claiming entitlement to T's estate. F was prepared to offer evidence that, on more than one occasion, T told him and others that T wished F to have T's entire estate. In a jurisdiction that follows the Uniform Probate Code provisions regarding reformation to correct mistakes, what is N's best argument against F's case?

T only formed the intent to distribute his estate to F sometime after the death of T's wife.

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, $100,000 will be distributed to his best friend and the rest of his estate will be distributed to his nephew.

T dies unmarried with a will whose only dispositive provisions devise her tangible personal property to her daughter, D, and her real property to her son, S. T's will contains no residuary clause. During the probate of T's estate it is determined that T's probate property consisted of bank accounts and securities, real property, and household furniture and furnishings. How will T's probate property be distributed?

T's household furniture and furnishings will be distributed to D, her real property will be distributed to S, and her bank accounts and securities will be distributed to her intestate heirs.

T dies while a domiciliary of State X, a U.S. jurisdiction. T owns real property in State Y, a U.S. jurisdiction. With respect to the real property T owns in State Y, which of the following is true?

T's real property must be probated in State Y.

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 executes a will on April 2, 2016 that contains only the following dispositive provision: "I give and devise all of my estate as provided in a separate document signed by me and dated and entitled 'The Separate Document Referred to in My Will.' Such document may be executed at any time after the execution of this will, and upon my death, the most recently dated of any such document shall control the disposition of my estate." Upon T's death on May 3, 2018, his April 2016 will and a signed, typed, and unwitnessed document titled "The Separate Writing Referred to in My Will" dated September 22, 2017 are found. The separate writing unambiguously expresses T's intent to distribute his estate to various persons at his death. What is the legal effect of T's will and accompanying writing?

The 2017 writing is ineffective to distribute T's estate under the incorporation by reference doctrine, because it was written after the will was executed.

The decedent dies survived by a 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.

On April 1, 2015, F, who owns a valuable painting entitled "Seymour Dreams," writes an email to his son, S, that reads in its entirety: "Dear S: I hereby give you the 'Seymour Dreams' painting currently hanging in my study. From this date forward, I want you to own this fine work of art. Love, Dad." F does not deliver the painting to S, who lives several hundred miles away. Although S received and read the email, neither F nor S makes any further mention of the painting. F dies intestate a few months later with the painting still hanging in his study. After F's death, the personal representative of F's estate claims the painting for the estate, maintaining that it was not gifted to S during F's lifetime because the delivery requirement for making gifts was not satisfied. S argues that from the time of the April 1, 2015, email, F held the painting in trust for S. Which of the following is the most accurate legal characterization of S's argument?

The argument is invalid as the facts show no intent on the part of F to create a trust.

Decedent dies with a will that purports to devise $10,000 in trust for the benefit of her dog, Fido, who survives her. Decedent's will names a trustee of the trust and gives specific directions regarding the use of the trust property for Fido's benefit and the trust is to continue until Fido's death. Which of the following best describes the legal effect of these provisions in Decedent's will?

The attempt to create a trust for Fido is likely valid as a type of "purpose trust."

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.

On July 1, the decedent and her husband are rushed to the hospital after suffering severe injuries in an automobile accident. The decedent dies at the hospital on the day of the accident. Aside from her husband, the decedent is survived by her sister. On July 7, the decedent's husband dies from injuries he suffered in the accident. The decedent's husband is survived only by his brother. If the current version of the Uniform Simultaneous Death Statute has been enacted in the jurisdiction, to whom will the decedent's intestate estate be distributed?

The decedent's husband

S executes a revocable trust and a "pour-over" will. S then transfers most of his property to the trust. When S dies, his probate estate consists of some tangible personal property valued at about $1,000 along with a bank account valued at about $1,000, while the trust contains much cash and valuable property. At his death, S owed a health care provider $10,000 for services rendered in connection with his last illness, which are not covered by his health insurance. Can the health care provider recover against the assets of the trust?

The health care provider can recover against the trust to the extent the assets of the estate are insufficient.

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?

The language creates a trust with F as trustee and Testator's surviving children as beneficiaries.

Testator loves to collect art and also regularly buys stock in Apple, Inc., the computer company. All of her paintings are prominently displayed in her large house, and her Apple stock is represented by certificates that she keeps in a drawer in her study. Unfortunately, Testator dies on January 6, 2021, leaving a will dated January 22, 2020, containing a clause that states as follows: "I may leave a separate list, signed and dated by me, that disposes of certain tangible personal property I own at my death. To the extent that such list is inconsistent with any provisions of this will, the list will control the disposition of those assets." Found with Testator's will is a list, signed by Testator and dated July 4, 2020, that purports to give four paintings (valued at $5,000 each) from the Testator's collection to her best friend, A, and all of Testator's stock in Apple, Inc. to her friend, B. Which of the following best describes the effect of the separate list left by Testator?

The list will likely be effective to distribute the paintings to A but not to distribute the Apple, Inc. stock to B.

H and his wife, W, each execute a separate will providing that the entire estate of the testator will go to the surviving spouse, if any, and if not, then to W's descendants, by representation. Each will contains the following clause: "On the same date this will is executed, my spouse has executed a will with similar provisions. I hereby agree not to revoke this will, in whole or in part, unless and until my spouse revokes my spouse's will." W dies first without revoking her will and H receives her estate. Two years later, H has his new lawyer draw up a will that devises his entire estate to charity. He dies the following year, having executed this new will. Which of the following best describes the legal effect of H's actions leading up to his death?

The new will is valid, because the contract H entered into did not affect the validity of his subsequent will.

T, whose son, S, is married to W, executes a will that provides that S can receive his share of T's estate only if S is no longer married to W no later than one year after T's death. T later dies with the will intact, at which time S is still married to W. Which of the following statements is the best advice to S as to the legal effect of this provision in T's will?

The provision, because it would encourage divorce, is invalid as contrary to public policy.

T's will provided as follows: "I give $100,000 to each of my siblings, X and Y, and $800,000 to Z." T left the residue of his estate to X. T's probate estate, after the payment of debts and expenses, contained assets totaling $800,000 in value. Who gets what from T's estate?

The residuary devise abates first, and then the general devises abate pro rata. Thus X and Y will each receive $80,000, and Z will receive $640,000. X will not receive a residuary devise.

T executes a declaration of revocable trust and a "pour-over" will. T then dies. Which of the following statements most accurately describes the trust?

The trust is an inter vivos trust.

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 the 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.

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.

Testator wishes to make some major revisions to her will and makes an appointment with her lawyer to do so. In the meantime, concerned that she may die before completing the legal revision process, she writes the following in the bottom footer of the first page of the will: "This will is hereby revoked, as my intent is to sign a new will to be prepared by my lawyer." Testator signs and writes in the date below this language. None of the testator's writing actually touches any of the words of the will. As it happens, Testator passes away on the eve of her appointment with her lawyer, and so never completes the process of executing a new will. The will with Testator's writing in the footer is found among her possessions after her death. If Testator's jurisdiction recognizes holographic wills, which of the following statements best describes the legal effect of the will?

The will is not revoked due to the doctrine of dependent relative revocation.

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 thorough 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

T executes a will that devises her automobile to her best friend, F. T is then involved in an automobile accident that results in her death and the destruction of the automobile. The automobile is covered by insurance. What is the best argument that T's estate should distribute the insurance proceeds to F pursuant to T's will?

Under the facts at hand, the jurisdiction should follow the intent theory of ademption.

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.

H and W are married to one another. Sometime after H and W's marriage, H becomes a participant in an employer-sponsored retirement plan governed by federal ERISA laws. H designates his daughter, X, who is not W's daughter, as the primary death beneficiary on his retirement account on a beneficiary designation form supplied by the plan sponsor. W consents, orally, to the designation. After H's subsequent death, W claims a right to the plan. Which of the following is most accurate in describing W's right to the plan benefits?

W is entitled to the benefits, because ERISA provides that a participant in an ERISA-governed plan cannot designate someone other than the participant's spouse as the primary death beneficiary of the participant's account in the plan unless the spouse consents in writing.

T has two adult children, F and G. T has a very good relationship with both of her children, but F lives near T while G lives several hundred miles away. Because T is getting on in age and needs help with her affairs, she decides to add F's name to her checking account so that F can help her pay her bills and make sure her account is balanced on an ongoing basis. T goes to the bank with F, and a bank employee has F sign a "signature card" for the account. F then takes over the task of paying T's bills from the account. T dies a couple of years later when the checking account balance is $20,000. T's will divides all of her assets between F and G equally. F maintains that the account is a nonprobate asset and should be paid solely to her, while G maintains that the account is a probate asset that should be distributed in equal shares according to T's will. If the jurisdiction follows majority rules, who will succeed to the ownership of the account?

Whether the account is a probate asset depends on whether T intended that F have survivorship rights at the time she added F's name to the account.

Testator, a single man, signs a will that devises all of his estate to his parents, if they survive him, and if not, then to his siblings in equal shares. A few years later, Testator meets and eventually marries Wife. Testator plans to change his will and devise his estate to Wife but dies unexpectedly before a new will can be signed. Which of the following best describes the likely distribution of Testator's probate estate?

Wife will receive a statutory share of Testator's estate, and the remaining amount, if any, will be distributed according to his will.

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.

S writes the following on the back of a lottery ticket: "This is my will. I give all of 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 practicing 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 were all present in L's conference room. T signed the will in the presence of 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 dismissed 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 of 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

Client meets with his lawyer, L, for the purpose of obtaining L's assistance with Client's estate planning. Client, who has no children and whose wife is deceased, tells L that he wishes to give all of his property in equal shares to "his nieces and nephews." Upon further discussion L learns that by reference to "nieces and nephews," Client was referring to those of the children of his wife's sister and the children of his own sister who survive him. Based on his conversation with Client, L prepares and Client executes a will that devises Client's estate to his "nieces and nephews." After Client dies with the will intact the probate court determines that, under state law, Client's "nieces and nephews" include only those persons who are the children of his sister, and not those who are the children of his wife's sister. Assuming the will cannot be reformed to reflect Client's intentions, is L potentially liable to the children of Client's wife's sister?

Yes, under the majority rule, a lawyer in this position is potentially liable to the intended beneficiaries of a client's estate.

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 personal 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 two 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 has adopted a statute that allows a separate list referred to in the will to dispose of tangible personal property.

T, 75 years old, is unmarried and has no descendants. Since T has no will and is having a love affair with his 39-year-old secretary, X, he executes a will leaving all his substantial property to X. Concerned that his siblings will contest his will on the basis of undue influence, T subsequently adopts X. T later dies with the will intact. Will T's adoption of X prevent a successful will contest?

Yes; adoption of X would prevent T's siblings from having standing to challenge the will.

In year 1, T executes a will devising "$1,000,000 to each of my children, X and Y" and devising the remainder of his estate to his wife, W. At the time T's will is executed he has only two children, X and Y. In year 2, T and W have another child, Z. Later in year 2, T dies unexpectedly, not having changed his will. Which of the following most accurately describes the interest that Z has in T's estate?

Z is a pretermitted child and has the right to a statutory share of T's estate.

T has the following property interests at his death: 1) A bank account titled jointly with rights of survivorship with Z. 2) A bank account titled in T's sole name, with Z named as a "payable on death" (POD) beneficiary. 3) A qualified employer-sponsored retirement account with Z named as primary beneficiary. 4) A house titled in the name of T and Z, as joint tenants. And 5) Certain household furniture and furnishings. T's will, executed before the above property interests were established, provides that X, not Z, will receive all of T's property. A codicil to T's will, executed after the above property interests were established, provides only that Z is to receive T's leather sofa. T is neither married nor in a domestic partnership. To which assets are Z and X entitled to at T's death?

Z will receive all the listed property interests except the household furniture and furnishings and will also receive the leather sofa.