Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

statuteprecedentappealtrialwilldivorcestatutory interpretationcondition precedent
jurisdictionappealtrialwilldivorce

Related Cases

Trosch v. Maryland Nat. Bank, 32 Md.App. 249, 359 A.2d 564
View Case »
Collier v. Bryant, 216 N.C.App. 419, 719 S.E.2d 70
View Case »
Timberlake v. Munford, 267 Ga. 631, 481 S.E.2d 217, 97 FCDR 608
View Case »
In re Cobb’s Will, 271 N.C. 307, 156 S.E.2d 285
View Case »
National Shawmut Bank of Boston v. Morey, 320 Mass. 492, 70 N.E.2d 316, 174 A.L.R. 871
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

Steele v. Chase, 151 Ind.App. 600, 281 N.E.2d 137

Facts

Carl Barany married Capitola Jacquetta Steele on January 26, 1968, and executed his will shortly thereafter, leaving his estate to her, with provisions for his stepson and brothers if she did not survive him by thirty days. The couple divorced on January 21, 1970, and Carl died on January 16, 1971, without revoking his will. The administrator of his estate petitioned the court to determine that the divorced wife and stepson had no interest in the estate, leading to the appeal.

On or about January 26, 1968, Carl Barany, the decedent, and Capitola Jacquetta Steele were married. Carl Barany died on January 16, 1971, without revoking his will or executing a new will.

Issue

Whether IC 1971, 29-1-5-8, Ind.Ann.Stat. s 6-508 (Burns 1953) operates to exclude the decedent's stepson from the terms of the decedent's will.

The sole issue presented by this appeal is whether IC 1971, 29-1-5-8, Ind.Ann.Stat. s 6-508 (Burns 1953) operates to exclude the decedent's stepson from the terms of the decedent's will.

Rule

If after making a will the testator is divorced, all provisions of the will in favor of the testator's spouse so divorced are thereby revoked.

If after making a will the testator is divorced, all provisions of the will in favor of the testator's spouse so divorced are thereby revoked.

Analysis

The court found that the provision in the will favoring the former wife was revoked by operation of law due to the divorce. It also determined that the stepson was entitled to a share of the estate because the statute required the divorced spouse to be treated as having predeceased the testator, thus satisfying the condition precedent for the stepson's inheritance.

This appears to be a question of first impression in this jurisdiction. However, other States have passed on this question.

Conclusion

The court affirmed the trial court's judgment that the divorced wife had no interest in the estate, but reversed the judgment regarding the stepson, remanding the case for further proceedings consistent with its opinion.

The judgment of the trial court that Capitola Jacquetta Barany (Steele) has no interest in the estate of Carl Barany, deceased, is affirmed; the judgment of the trial court that William Kenneth Steele has no interest in the decedent's estate is reversed; and this cause is remanded to the trial court with instructions to enter judgment consistent with this opinion.

Who won?

William Kenneth Steele prevailed in part, as the court recognized his entitlement to a share of the estate based on the testator's intent and the statutory interpretation that treated the divorced spouse as having predeceased the testator.

The court held that the manifest intent of Carl Barany must be given effect as required by the last sentence of s 6-508, supra.

You must be