Complexities of Slayer Statutes
The introduction to the article and the May 2010 edition of The Estate Analyst is below:
It is a common law principle that murderers should not profit from their crimes. Most states have codified these rules in “slayer statutes.” Thus, if Jack kills Jill, a typical slayer statute would bar Jack from inheriting assets from Jill’s estate.
As simple as that sounds, life situations are anything but straightforward. Jack may own property jointly with Jill. Jack may know that Jill is about to get married and change her will and that her current death will benefit his daughter, Jane. Should Jane benefit if Jack kills Jill before Jill can change her will? What if Jack commits murder and is found not guilty by reason of insanity? What if Jill was terminally ill and asked Jack to assist her in ending her life?
What if Jack falls down, breaks his “crown” and Jill comes tumbling after in a murder/suicide combination with uncertainty as to the order of death? Can Jill be presumed to have died first so that she can inherit from Jack’s estate?
It’s not so simple, af ter all. There are dozens of other situations and circumstances that continue to arise. Even the IRS has gotten into the discussion with a recent ruling on IRA distribution calculations when the intended beneficiary is disqualified under a slayer statute.