Case Citations [1] (April 2017 through August 2017)

handle is hein.ali/retpwodt9942 and id is 1 raw text is: 





           PROPERTY 3D: WILLS AND OTHER

                       DONATIVE TRANSFERS





              DIVISION   I. PROBATE   TRANSFERS (WILLS AND INTESTACY)

                            CHAPTER 3.   EXECUTION OF WILLS

                            PART  A. EXECUTION FORMALITIES

 3.1 Attested Wills

Alaska, 2016. Com. (j) quot. in sup. and cit. in ftn. After decedent's daughter petitioned for formal
probate of a holographic will, decedent's grandchildren opposed the petition, claiming that decedent's
handwritten name at the beginning of the document was not a signature as required for it to be
considered a valid will under Alaska's holographic-will statute. The trial court granted partial summary
judgment for daughter, finding that a terminal signature was not required. Affirming, this court held that
a testator's handwritten name in the exordium clause of a holographic will was sufficient to satisfy the
statute's signature requirement unless the instrument was otherwise incomplete. The court noted that the
majority of states with statutes like Alaska's, which did not specify the location of the signature, had
declined to read the signature requirement as implicitly requiring a terminal signature, consistent with
Restatement Third of Property: Wills & Other Donative Transfers  3.1. Matter of Estate of Baker, 386
P.3d 1228, 1234.

 3.2 Holographic Wills

Alaska, 2016. Cit. in ftn. After decedent's daughter petitioned for formal probate of a holographic will,
decedent's grandchildren opposed the petition, claiming that decedent's handwritten name at the
beginning of the document was not a signature as required for it to be considered a valid will under
Alaska's holographic-will statute. The trial court granted partial summary judgment for daughter,
finding that a terminal signature was not required. Affirming, this court held that a testator's handwritten
name  in the exordium clause of a holographic will was sufficient to satisfy the statute's signature
requirement unless the instrument was otherwise incomplete. The court noted that, under Restatement
Third of Property: Wills & Other Donative Transfers  3.2, every American holographic-will statute
required the testator to sign the will, and that the majority of states with statutes like Alaska's, which did
not specify the location of the signature, had declined to read the signature requirement as implicitly
requiring a terminal signature. Matter of Estate of Baker, 386 P.3d 1228, 1232.



                         DIVISION   III. PROTECTIVE DOCTRINES






           For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing nearly 2,700 academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Access to this content requires a subscription. Please visit the following page to request a quote or trial:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?