In re estate of Duke

Facts:
Duke prepared a holographic will providing that upon his death his wife would
inherit his estate and that if he and his wife died at the same time, specific
charities would inherit his estate.
Will had no provisions addressing the disposition of his estate if he lived linger than
his wife [and he did]
Will had a disinheritance clause
Issue: whether the traditional conclusive bar to admissibility of extrinsic evidence for
unambiguous wills should be overruled.
Rules:
The categorical bar on reformation of wills is not justified, and an unambiguous will
may be reformed if clear and convincing evidence establishes that the will contains
a mistake in the expression of the testators intent at the time the will was drafted
and also establishes the testators actual specific intent at the time the will was
drafted.
Reasoning:
over time judicial sentiment on evaluating extrinsic evidence has shifted
creation of uncertainty in estate planning:
o Court confronted the reality that some courts were already essentially
reforming wills under the guise of construing an ambiguity
evaluated the efforts of the legislature in the probate arena and concluding that
legislation did not expressly preclude the Supreme Court from changing the law
o the changes in legislation have reflected judicial shifts in this arena, and are
not to bar future changes
In order to serve the paramount purpose of probate to interpret and give effect to
a persons testamentary wishes courts should be permitted to reform wills to
correct mistakes. In doing so, the Court noted that its new rule meant wills would
be treated no differently from other written documents when it comes to mistakes
found in those documents. [contracts under SOF]
ruling also eliminates an inconsistency that may have had disparate socioeconomic
impact
o the current regime of allowing reformation for trusts, but not wills, appears
to favor those with the means to establish estate plans that avoid probate
proceedings, and to deny a remedy with respect to the estates of individuals
who effect their plans through traditional testamentary documents.
o decision creates a greater parity by allowing the reformation remedy for the
paupers mistaken will document as well as the princes trust document.
High bar of CCE
o In a will dispute, the testator is deceased and the possibility of fraud by
unscrupulous heirs cannot be ignored
o Giving a nod to the evidentiary concerns underpinning the statute of frauds
and the statute of wills, the High Court imposed a clear and convincing
standard for the reformation of wills. That standard, higher than the normal
preponderance of the evidence standard used in most civil disputes, but

lower than the beyond a reasonable doubt standard employed in criminal

cases, is an effort by the Court to exclude cases where either the mistake or
the true intent are difficult to ascertain.
o the litigant hoping to reform a will must now show clearly and
convincingly: (i) that there is a drafting mistake and (ii) what the testators
actual, specific intent for the property was at the time the testator executed
the will.
Floodgates
o The Court noted that because of the rule allowing extrinsic evidence to find
an ambiguity and resolve it, any additional amount of litigation is likely
limited.
o estates will only be litigated if there is enough money at stake, the benefits
of consistency outweigh the risk of increased litigation and, as to those cases
that support a reformation claim but not an ambiguity claim, the clear and
convincing evidentiary standard will help the probate court to filter out
weak claims.
o while the justices seem to tacitly acknowledge increased litigation, they
conclude that there is a sufficient need for the new remedy and that they
have installed sufficient safeguards to ameliorate abuse.