A WILL to be Interpreted
by
Shanti Howard and
Audrea Bankston
Problem: A Will to be Interpreted
"A client of mine," said a lawyer,
"was on the point of death when his wife was about to present
him with a child. I drew up his will, in which he settled two-thirds
of his estate upon his son (if it should happen to be a boy) and
one-third on the mother. But if the child should be a girl, then
two-thirds would go to the mother and one-third to the daughter."
"As fate would have it, after his death,
twins were born -- a boy and a girl. A legal point then arose.
How was the estate to be equitably divided among the three --
the mother, the son, and the daughter -- in the closest possible
accordance with the spirit of the dead man's will?"
Develop an argument from the point of view
of a judge who must weigh all of the
alternatives and decide what is in closest possible accordance
with the spirit of the dead man's will.
I tell you, this one touched home. I was just
involved with a court case that involved my brother against me....with
that said, let's argue.
When I was in the office of the mediator/judge,
we had to present sides. In this case, I believe that the son
will fight first, because it seems as if he has more at stake.
Next, we will look at the view from the daughter's perspective.
Last, we will see what the mother's defense would say. Finally,
the judge must make some sort of judgement on behalf of the estate.
The Son's Attorney:
If arguing the case from
the point of view of the son, his attorney would bluntly say:
seeing as though the
son's father eagerly wanted to have his legacy live on and to
pursue all his dreams and admirations as well as carry on the
"....." name, the father most humbly wanted his estate
settled in a most timely fashion and with these things in mind:
the father wanted his
only begotten son to have two-thirds of the estate...
this means:
the son's fair share
would be six-ninths of the estate
the daughter shall
receive one-ninth of the estate
the mother shall
receive two-ninths of the estate
The Daughter's Attorney:
If arguing the case from
the point of view of the daughter, her attorney would bluntly
say:
seeing as though
the daughter's father wanted to have his only daughter live a
life of luxury and no problems to think of,
her father would
most eagerly want his estate to be settled quite quickly and without
any undue problems...I believe he had these thoughts upon his
death bed:
the daughter should
get nothing less than one-third of the estate...
this means:
the daughter's fair
share would be three-ninths of the estate
the son shall receive
four-ninths of the estate
the mother shall
receive two-ninths of the estate
The Mother's Attorney:
If arguing the case from
the point of view of the daughter, her attorney would blatantly
say:
seeing as though
this woman endured all the hardships and hard work of living and
being with this man for such a looooong time, it is only just
that the mother of his children receive the best of care and be
given the fair amount due to her...
the mother of his
children should absolutely get nothing less than two-thirds of
his estate
(this would be argued
if and only if the attorney is a greedy attorney...find out what
a fair attorney might say...)
this means:
the mother's fair
share of the estate would be a total of sixth-ninths
the son shall receive
two-ninths of the estate
the daughter shall
receive one-ninth of the estate
now, had the mother had a
more fair attorney, here is what he/she may have asked for:
the mother's fair share of
the estate would be a total of three-sixths
the son shall receive one-third
of the estate
the daughter shall receive
one-sixth of the estate
Return