Purchase a course multi-pack for yourself or a friend and save up to 50%!
5-COURSE MULTI-PACK $180
10-COURSE MULTI-PACK $300
Accelerated 1-year bachelor's program
Question 1
Norton's will leaves his estate to his wife, Angel. Subsequently, Norton and Angel get a divorce. Later, Norton dies before changing his will. Angel is still entitled to the estate.
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct The divorce automatically revokes gifts to the testator's former spouse. Here, the divorce cancelled Angel's ability to inherit from Norton's estate. It is irrelevant that he never got around to changing his will. Accordingly, because of the divorce, Angel is not entitled to the share in the estate.
Incorrect! The divorce automatically revokes gifts to the testator's former spouse. Here, the divorce cancelled Angel's ability to inherit from Norton's estate. It is irrelevant that he never got around to changing his will. Accordingly, because of the divorce, Angel is not entitled to the share in the estate.
Question 2
Rosalie bequeaths $120,000 to each of her children, Stacey, Kelvin, and Stephanie and leaves her residuary estate to her brother, Thomas. Thereafter, she adopts a child, Mai. Rosalie never changes her will before she dies two years later. Who is entitled to inherit from her estate?
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct Most states' pretermitted children statutes operate only in favor of children born or adopted after the will's execution to ensure they are not excluded from the will. There is no distinction between natural and adopted children. Here, Rosalie made gifts to all her existing children at the time the will was executed. Subsequently, she adopted Mai but did not have a chance to modify her will. Since there is no indication that the omission was intentional, Mai will also share in the estate. Depending on the jurisdiction, either Mai' portion will come out of the residuary or the gifts to the other three children will be abated in pro rata amounts to provide for Mai's share.
Incorrect! Most states' pretermitted children statutes operate only in favor of children born or adopted after the will's execution to ensure they are not excluded from the will. There is no distinction between natural and adopted children. Here, Rosalie made gifts to all her existing children at the time the will was executed. Subsequently, she adopted Mai but did not have a chance to modify her will. Since there is no indication that the omission was intentional, Mai will also share in the estate. Depending on the jurisdiction, either Mai' portion will come out of the residuary or the gifts to the other three children will be abated in pro rata amounts to provide for Mai's share.
Question 3
Gerald's will devised his one-half interest in farm land in Nebraska to two nephews, Milton and Lucas, each taking one-half. The residuary was left to his brother, Samuel. Lucas predeceased Gerald. Milton is entitled to the entire one-half interest in the Nebraska farm.
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct A class gift is a gift to a group of persons, uncertain in number at the time of the gift, to be ascertained at a future time. Members of the class take an equal share of the property. Here, Gerald named two specific individuals, not a group of unknown persons as beneficiaries of the Nebraska farm land. In addition, Gerald used no typical class language, such as 'nephews.' Accordingly, Milton is not entitled to Lucas's share of the asset. See, e.g., Dawson v. Yucas, 238 N.E.2d 305 (Ill. 1968).
Incorrect! A class gift is a gift to a group of persons, uncertain in number at the time of the gift, to be ascertained at a future time. Members of the class take an equal share of the property. Here, Gerald named two specific individuals, not a group of unknown persons as beneficiaries of the Nebraska farm land. In addition, Gerald used no typical class language, such as 'nephews.' Accordingly, Milton is not entitled to Lucas's share of the asset. See, e.g., Dawson v. Yucas, 238 N.E.2d 305 (Ill. 1968).
Question 4
Gerald's will devised his farm land in Nebraska to his brothers and sisters, to share equally. Gerald had seven brothers and sisters, three of whom died leaving lineal descendents before the execution of the will and two of whom died leaving lineal descendents after the execution of the will but before Gerald's death. After Gerald's death, who is entitled to the Nebraska farm?
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct A class gift is a gift to a group of persons, uncertain in number at the time of the gift, to be ascertained at a future time. If a member of the class dies before the testator, his interest goes to the surviving members of the class, unless the will provides otherwise. Here, five of Gerald's siblings predeceased him'three before the will's execution (they were never eligible to inherit) and two after the will's execution. Accordingly, the two surviving siblings would receive the farm and split it equally. See, e.g., Drafts v. Drafts, 114 So.2d 473 (1959); Jennings v. Newman, 221 S.W.2d 487 (Mo. 1949).
Incorrect! A class gift is a gift to a group of persons, uncertain in number at the time of the gift, to be ascertained at a future time. If a member of the class dies before the testator, his interest goes to the surviving members of the class, unless the will provides otherwise. Here, five of Gerald's siblings predeceased him'three before the will's execution (they were never eligible to inherit) and two after the will's execution. Accordingly, the two surviving siblings would receive the farm and split it equally. See, e.g., Drafts v. Drafts, 114 So.2d 473 (1959); Jennings v. Newman, 221 S.W.2d 487 (Mo. 1949).
Question 5
Doris's will devises her brownstone in Brooklyn Heights "to the children of my son, Anthony." At the time the will was executed, Anthony had one child, Jose. Subsequently, Anthony had two more children: Dwayne and Ethel. Jose predeceased Doris, leaving three children, William, Frederick and June. If Doris dies in a jurisdiction that applies the anti-lapse statute to class gifts, how is the brownstone divided?
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct In jurisdictions that apply the anti-lapse statute to class gifts, if the class member who predeceases the testator is within the requisite degree of relationship covered under the statute and he or she leaves descendents who survive the testator, these individuals can be substituted instead of the class gift rule applying (surviving class members take). Here, Jose was Doris's grandson, a covered relationship under the statute. In addition, he left offspring; therefore, the anti-lapse statute will apply and his share of the estate will pass to his kids. As the grandchildren, Dwayne and Ethel each get their 1/3rd share of the estate. William, Frederick and June split their deceased father's 1/3rd share. As such, each gets a 1/9th share (1/3rd * 1/3rd) of the estate.
Incorrect! In jurisdictions that apply the anti-lapse statute to class gifts, if the class member who predeceases the testator is within the requisite degree of relationship covered under the statute and he or she leaves descendents who survive the testator, these individuals can be substituted instead of the class gift rule applying (surviving class members take). Here, Jose was Doris's grandson, a covered relationship under the statute. In addition, he left offspring; therefore, the anti-lapse statute will apply and his share of the estate will pass to his kids. As the grandchildren, Dwayne and Ethel each get their 1/3rd share of the estate. William, Frederick and June split their deceased father's 1/3rd share. As such, each gets a 1/9th share (1/3rd * 1/3rd) of the estate.
Question 6
Doris's will devises her brownstone in Brooklyn Heights "to the children of my son, Anthony." At the time the will was executed, Anthony had one child, Jose. Subsequently, Anthony had two more children: Dwayne and Ethel. Jose predeceased Doris, leaving three children, William, Frederick and June. If Doris dies in a jurisdiction that does not apply the anti-lapse statute to class gifts, how is the brownstone divided?
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct In states that do not apply the anti-lapse dictates to class gifts, the surviving members of the class are the only ones entitled to a share of the property because there was no lapse if there are still beneficiaries alive to take the property. Here, Dwayne and Ethel are the only surviving members of the designated class. As such, they each will get section of the brownstone, as tenants in common.
Incorrect! In states that do not apply the anti-lapse dictates to class gifts, the surviving members of the class are the only ones entitled to a share of the property because there was no lapse if there are still beneficiaries alive to take the property. Here, Dwayne and Ethel are the only surviving members of the designated class. As such, they each will get section of the brownstone, as tenants in common.
Correct
Incorrect!
Question 7
Sinclair's will devises her personal residence in Oakland, CA to her niece, Maxine, if she survives her. One day, Sinclair and Maxine were driving back to Los Angeles from Oakland, via Highway 1. Midway, they were killed when Sinclair's car drove off the cliff. Who inherits the Oakland residence?
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct According to the USDA, when two people die under circumstances that make it impossible to determine who survived the other, the property is distributed as though she survived the other person, unless the will specifies otherwise. The result'the gift lapses. Here, there is no way to tell who died first. Accordingly, the USDA treats the situation as if Maxine predeceased Sinclair. As such, the gift to Maxine lapses and the Oakland residence becomes part of the residuary estate
Incorrect! According to the USDA, when two people die under circumstances that make it impossible to determine who survived the other, the property is distributed as though she survived the other person, unless the will specifies otherwise. The result'the gift lapses. Here, there is no way to tell who died first. Accordingly, the USDA treats the situation as if Maxine predeceased Sinclair. As such, the gift to Maxine lapses and the Oakland residence becomes part of the residuary estate