logo image

The inheritance Essay

   A will is a valid legal document that guarantees a deceased person’s property will pass to his or her proposed heirs. A will is quite important for it also clearly leaves a public record of rights of real estate through appointment of guardians of the deceased’s minor children and assigning a personal representative to execute the management  of the estate until the deceased’s taxes, debts and administrative expenses are paid and the remaining chattels has been distributed to the rightful parties. An  individual who leaves a valid is said to die testate while one who dies without a valid will is said to die intestate and the rule of law of that particular land will apply to determine the deceased’s heirs for the reason of  allocating property.

   The deceased may alter or revoke a will until death, including making partial amendments of a will and each change must be done in a style that gratifies the statutory formalities. A will can be revoked by physical act and subsequent formal writing but mutilation, burning and other physical act must be followed by an intention to revoke else the will remains legally valid in spite of its physical destruction. Certain changes

Need essay sample on "The inheritance"? We will write a custom essay sample specifically for you for only $ 13.90/page

in a will, will result in whole or portion of a will being inherently revoked. Divorce most commonly revokes a souvenir to a former spouse.

   The laws of most states defend certain family members from disinheritance. These usually relate  entirely to a surviving spouse but some cover the children of the deceased as well. Majority of states assign a spousal elective share that assures a surviving spouse a particular fraction like one-third of the deceased spouse’s estate. A  claim by a spouse of being given less than that may elect to take the statutory portion and the remaining property gets distributed to the other recipients. Children or descendants who may not be specifically mentioned in the will may be regarded as unintentionally excluded and therefore entitled to a statutory share. However in many states, omitted children are not shielded unless the last will was executed before the child’s birth or adoption.

   Some states have considered the latest version of the uniform parentage act which has provisions specifically addressing posthumous parentage in the perspective of assisted reproduction. The uniform parentage act presents if an individual consented in a record to be a parent through aided reproduction dies before replacement of sperm, embryos or eggs, the deceased person is not a parent of the resulting child unless the deceased person consented in a record that if assisted reproduction were to happen prior to death, the deceased would be a parent of the child..

   In our case where Eds left a will, it explains clearly that rightful heir to inheritance is his first wife Madeleine. A will is legally binding and whatever is contained in it should be implemented to the later. Eds had all time to make alterations on the will after divorcing his first wife but never took that initiative meaning that whoever executes the will must do it in accordance to the contents. Madeleine never had a child with Edi and as is stipulated in the will she was to inherit the whole of Eds wealthy. We also see that Edi loved his first wife and that he never intended  to divorce her for it were the case of completely divorcing her, he would have hasten the process of     changing the will to favour his second wife Catherine. Due to the age of his first wife he was a little bit considerate to live the will unaltered for she was past the age of bearing children and could have been unfair for him to live everything to the second wife and again the women was getting older ,therefore working strength had reduced. Her second was strong and could find another man to get married and therefore never trusted her with his assets. Catherine was young and had never tasted marriage like her counter part Madeline. Madeleine seems to have been in the marriage with Edi for a long time than Catherine, this brings about the trait of Eds being quite confidence with his first wife. Anybody on this earth will always trust someone whom he or she has been with for sometime because you would have known each others weakness and strength. Catherine was so fresh in marriage, and less trusted by Eds. Furthermore she was getting immoral by her idea of having a child after the death of her husband so as to fully inherit the wealth of Edi leaving nothing to the first wife. Her idea fell short of reasoning in legal dimensions, for her to have been successful in her mission she should have thought of having a binding agreement between her and her husband to cover for any eventualities. Furthermore laws of  many states recognize only those children born naturally before and after the death of the person.

   However in the marriage institution when two opposite sex join together to become husband and wife any one of them is entitled to full inheritance if one of them dies. Marriage legally binds the parties together and therefore a document to prove that they have stayed as husband and wife exists and will act as evidence in the process of claiming the deceased properties. Catherine was married to Eds legally after divorcing Madeleine and the later seems to have been compensated when they were filing divorce. By divorcing Madeleine, Eds had cleared any financial obligations to free himself from any more responsibilities and therefore Madeleine has no right for inheritance and should leave Catherine to inherit everything even if she has no child with the deceased.

   Finally I will conclude by sympathizing with Catherine for she should have proposed quick amendments to the will. Anyone carrying out the execution of the will, will rule in favour of Madeleine. She should have foreseen the idea of putting a written record with her husband regarding the use of the stored sperm, so that a child born after the death of her husband should guarantee her full inheritance altogether. Eds was a very controversial man because he was reluctant to make amendments on the will and could not decide to who should his stored sperm be used. His first wife was past the child bearing age and therefore he should have been specific. Catherine efforts to have a baby posthumously is justifiable in order to enjoy full inheritance of her husband wealth with her child.

References

Beyer, Gerry(1999).Wills, Trusts and Estates: Examples and Explanations.Newyork:Aspen

Andersen,Roger (1999).Understanding Trusts and Estates,2nd Edition.Newypork:Mathew Bender and Company

Can’t wait to take that assignment burden offyour shoulders?

Let us know what it is and we will show you how it can be done!
×
Sorry, but copying text is forbidden on this website. If you need this or any other sample, please register

Already on Businessays? Login here

No, thanks. I prefer suffering on my own
Sorry, but copying text is forbidden on this website. If you need this or any other sample register now and get a free access to all papers, carefully proofread and edited by our experts.
Sign in / Sign up
No, thanks. I prefer suffering on my own
Not quite the topic you need?
We would be happy to write it
Join and witness the magic
Service Open At All Times
|
Complete Buyer Protection
|
Plagiarism-Free Writing

Emily from Businessays

Hi there, would you like to get such a paper? How about receiving a customized one? Check it out https://goo.gl/chNgQy

We use cookies to give you the best experience possible. By continuing we’ll assume you’re on board with our cookie policy