Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 16,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 223 casebooks ► [ Ссылка ]
Estate of Kuralt | 981 P.2d 771 (1999)
A man considered leaving a bequest to his mistress. Because she was a secret in his life, his wills and codicils made his intent a mystery in his death in Estate of Kuralt.
Charles Kuralt had a wife, Petie, and a long term secret mistress, Patricia Shannon. For three decades, Kuralt financially supported Shannon. Kuralt bought a twenty acre parcel of land in Montana. Then, Kuralt bought two more parcels, totaling ninety acres, next to the twenty acre parcel.
Kuralt executed a holographic, meaning handwritten, will, giving Shannon all Kuralt’s Montana property on his death. Later, Kuralt executed a will in New York that explicitly revoked all previous wills. The New York will gave Petie all Kuralt’s property. The New York will didn’t specifically address the Montana property or mention Shannon.
After executing the New York will, Kuralt wanted to give Shannon the twenty acre parcel and keep their relationship a secret, so he gave Shannon money for the purchase. They completed the sale. Kuralt planned to transfer the other ninety acres in the same fashion.
Kuralt wrote Shannon a letter, informing her that he was very ill. In his letter, he stated, quote, “I’ll have a lawyer visit the hospital to be sure you inherit the rest of the place in Montana if it comes to that,” unquote. Kuralt died a couple weeks later without executing any documents.
Shannon asked the court to probate the letter Kuralt sent just before he died as a holographic will. But Petie argued that the letter wasn’t a will and, under Kuralt’s New York will, the ninety acres went to Petie. The court conducted an evidentiary hearing. Shannon wanted the court to allow evidence about the transfer of twenty acres as extrinsic evidence of the intent behind Kuralt’s letter. The court admitted the extrinsic evidence. Then, the court granted Petie’s partial motion for summary judgment. It reasoned that the letter wasn’t a will, but an expression of intent to make one in the future. Shannon appealed.
Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: [ Ссылка ]
The Quimbee App features over 16,300 case briefs keyed to 223 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► [ Ссылка ]
Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: [ Ссылка ]
Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here: Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► [ Ссылка ]
Quimbee Case Brief App ► [ Ссылка ]
Facebook ► [ Ссылка ]
Twitter ► [ Ссылка ]
#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries
![](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/SsKK2eSntRQ/maxresdefault.jpg)