Case Brief
Allen v. Dalk
CITATION: Supreme Court of Florida No. SC01-2 (2002)
PARTIES: Allen (Niece) v. Dalk (Half-sister)
FACTS: Ms. Dalk, disputed the validity of a will claimed to be that of her half-sister, the decedent, McPeak. Decedent signed four originals of a living will, three originals of durable power of attorney, but failed to sign her will. PRIOR PROCEEDINGS: The lower courts determined that the will was invalid.
ISSUE: Whether the will of the decedent McPeak was properly executed in accordance with the Florida law.
HOLDING: 1) No. 2) No, ordering a constructive trust would validate an invalid will.
REASONING: Every will must be signed at the end or that the testator’s name be subscribed at the end of the will by some other person, in the testator’s presence and at his direction. In order to make a valid will, the testator must strictly comply with the provisions for formal execution. In this case there is no way of knowing that the decedent’s failure to sign was a mistake or not.
DISPOSITION: The lower courts determination of invalidity is affirmed.
COMMENTS: It is evident that the will was not signed by the decedent and in accordance to Florida law, a will is not valid unless it has been executed with the testator’s signature to assure authenticity and avoid fraud. However, it is clear from the signed duplicates that the missing signature on the will resulted from a mistake. The decedent intended to sign the will but did not, due to this fact, the will is not entitled to probate because of the absence of her signature. Once a will is declared invalid, a testator’s intent is no longer controlling and the property must pass intestate.
ANALYSIS: In general, the state’s judicial viewpoint as to how firmly the testator must comply with pertinent statutes varies. Common law required total compliance with procedures. Some states require total compliance but current trends seem to require only substantial
CITATION: Supreme Court of Florida No. SC01-2 (2002)
PARTIES: Allen (Niece) v. Dalk (Half-sister)
FACTS: Ms. Dalk, disputed the validity of a will claimed to be that of her half-sister, the decedent, McPeak. Decedent signed four originals of a living will, three originals of durable power of attorney, but failed to sign her will. PRIOR PROCEEDINGS: The lower courts determined that the will was invalid.
ISSUE: Whether the will of the decedent McPeak was properly executed in accordance with the Florida law.
HOLDING: 1) No. 2) No, ordering a constructive trust would validate an invalid will.
REASONING: Every will must be signed at the end or that the testator’s name be subscribed at the end of the will by some other person, in the testator’s presence and at his direction. In order to make a valid will, the testator must strictly comply with the provisions for formal execution. In this case there is no way of knowing that the decedent’s failure to sign was a mistake or not.
DISPOSITION: The lower courts determination of invalidity is affirmed.
COMMENTS: It is evident that the will was not signed by the decedent and in accordance to Florida law, a will is not valid unless it has been executed with the testator’s signature to assure authenticity and avoid fraud. However, it is clear from the signed duplicates that the missing signature on the will resulted from a mistake. The decedent intended to sign the will but did not, due to this fact, the will is not entitled to probate because of the absence of her signature. Once a will is declared invalid, a testator’s intent is no longer controlling and the property must pass intestate.
ANALYSIS: In general, the state’s judicial viewpoint as to how firmly the testator must comply with pertinent statutes varies. Common law required total compliance with procedures. Some states require total compliance but current trends seem to require only substantial