On July
17, 2018, the Michigan Court of Appeals upheld an unconventional will left by 21
year old Duane Horton II (See Michigan Court of Appeals Case No. 339737). Duane committed suicide in 2015, but before
doing so, he wrote in his journal one last time. In the undated and handwritten entry, he
referenced a note he had left on his cell phone. He provided the password and email so that
the note could be accessed.
On his
cell phone, Duane had typed a will, detailing his belongings and the
individuals he wished to inherit the items.
He specifically left out his mother, stating, “If at all possible, make
sure that my trust fund goes to my half-sister Shella, and only her. Not my mother.”
Duane
already had a court-appointed conservator, Guardianship and Alternatives, Inc.
(GAI), and it filed to be the personal representative of his estate. Not surprisingly, Duane’s mother, Lanora
Jones, also wanted to be the personal representative of her son’s estate.
The
lower court in Berrien County determined that GAI had set forth “clear and
convincing evidence” that Duane’s “electronic note was intended by decedent to
constitute his will.” Under MCL
700.2503, the probate court accepted the cell phone note as a valid will.
Duane’s
mom appealed this ruling, arguing that the document could not be construed as a
valid will under Michigan law. She
further believed that the lower court was incorrect in determining that GAI
offered enough evidence to prove her son intended the document to be his will.
Michigan
statute 700.2502 provides that a will must be in writing, signed by the
testator (or by someone else at his direction and in his “conscious presence”)
and witnessed by two individuals. If all
of these requirements are not met, it could still be considered a “holographic
will,” so long as the document is dated, contains the testator’s signature and
the meat and potatoes of the will are in his handwriting.
MCL
700.2502 provides for exceptions to the requirements for a will – one of those
is set forth in MCL 700.2503. In part,
MCL 700.2503 states that despite not complying with the formal statutory
requirements of a will, a “document or writing is treated as if it had been
executed in compliance with that section if the proponent of the document or
writing establishes by clear and convincing evidence that the decedent intended
the document or writing to constitute any of the following: (a) The decedent’s will….”
In
Duane’s case, the Court of Appeals found it very clear that he wrote the
document knowing it would be read after his death; he offered apologies and
said goodbye to those he was leaving behind.
The distribution of his property was also explicit, describing who he
wanted to leave certain items to, and in this case, who he did not intend to
inherit his estate.
The
Court of Appeals concluded that Duane and his mother had “at best, a strained
relationship,” which supported his decision to not leave anything to her. It upheld the lower court and affirmed that
the cell phone note was indeed a valid will.
This was one case where a mother’s love (or lack thereof) was not
forgotten.
No comments:
Post a Comment