INTERPRETATION: Testamentary scheme supports gift by implication. The decedent’s will made gifts of $2,000 to each of her eight children and two stepchildren, gave the largest amount that could pass free of federal estate tax to her nominated trustee in trust for her spouse for life, remainder to the 10 children and stepchildren and to the descendants of any who did not survive, and the residue to her spouse. The will made no provision if the spouse predeceased the decedent which happened. At the decedent’s death, the trust could not be funded because the decedent’s applicable exclusion amount had been consumed by lifetime gifts made by her agent, one of her eight children. Had the trust been funded, the remainders in the children, all of whom survived the decedent, would have accelerated. The failure of the residuary gift meant that the residue passed under the intestacy statute to the decedent’s eight children. One of the stepchildren began a proceeding to construe the will and prevailed in the Surrogate’s Court. On appeal, a New York intermediate appellate court affirmed, holding that the decedent’s general testamentary plan as evidenced in the will shows that the decedent intended to treat her children and stepchildren equally, does not show that the decedent intended a different result if her spouse predeceased, and therefore the general plan must be carried out by implying a will provision giving the residue of the estate equally to all ten children. In re Estate of Warren, 39 N.Y.S. 3d 282 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016).
Special thanks to William LaPiana (Professor of Law, New York Law School) for bringing this case to my attention.
