.webp)
The estate law here in Maryland is the product of many developments which have occurred over a long period of time. Some of the most foundational cases in Maryland’s estate law transpired well over a century ago. Many of these foundational cases are still cited relatively frequently, which shouldn’t surprise us given that these cases often include precedents which haven’t been overturned or even modified. If we conceive of Maryland’s body of estate law as one large construction project, we can say that the foundation, scaffolding, and much of the building itself has already been erected, piece by piece, during the course of the past century or so.
The fact that many of these precedents are still cited, and are still very much “good law,” is one of the reasons why we continue to discuss cases which are not of recent origin. We also think that readers can benefit from understanding the importance of the technical facets of estate law: our readers need to know that even a seemingly small defect can literally lead to the demise of a will or other instrument.
The case of Western Maryland College v. McKinstry (1892) is one of the earliest cases in Maryland’s law on wills, and still relevant to this day. Let’s go over the facts of this case and discuss its significance.
Facts of the Case
The testator in this case, Mary McKinstry, attempted to bequeath certain personal property – in total, $5,000, a relatively large sum in 1888 (the year the testator attempted to create the will) – to Western Maryland College. The testator tried to create the will in an unconventional manner: the testator wrote the will on the last page of a Bible, and she failed to obtain any witness signatures. Although the language on the page (or “leaf,” as it’s referred to in the opinion) was clear, and the intent of the testator was clear too, Maryland law in 1888 had the “two witness” requirement which still stands today. So, although the testator obviously intended to transfer the personal property to the college, the record was clear that no witness signatures had been procured, and so the document suffered from a technical defect from the outset.
When the will was brought to probate, an interested party (“Mordecai McKinstry”) challenged the will’s validity based on the presence of this alleged technical defect. The court agreed that this defect undermined the validity of the will, and then an appeal was filed by the trustees of the college. The central question on appeal was whether the technical defect could defeat the will given the fact that the testator’s intent was absolutely clear.
Ruling & Analysis
The ruling of the trial court was affirmed, meaning the technical defect (of lack of witness signatures) was enough to overcome anything which could be used to establish the testator’s intent. The appellate division reiterated the importance of the two witness requirement which had been part of Maryland’s law as of 1888 (the Maryland Code of 1888). Even though the testator had capacity, and the “form” of the purported will shows an intent to bequeath the property to the college, these firm, unambiguous requirements could not be “waived” or overcome; witness signatures were determined a necessary part of what makes a valid and enforceable will.
Again, one of the reasons why we reference older cases is because many of these cases introduce principles which are still in use. In this famous case, we can see the contours of certain will requirements: because the testator’s document lacked witness signatures, the “plain and imperative” requirements of Maryland’s statute hadn’t been met. So, this is an early example of how failure to follow the strict procedures for creating a valid will renders such an attempt pointless.
If you’re preparing to create a will, the last thing you want is to begin down this path only to end up producing an unenforceable document when it’s apparently finished. In the case of Western Maryland College v. McKinstry, the will was defeated, and so the decedent was literally ruled as having passed away intestate – in other words, as though she never even attempted a will at all! You want to avoid this predicament, and so having a qualified estate planning attorney in these circumstances is essential.
Contact the Murphy Law Firm for More Resources
Readers who want to know more about the technical requirements of a valid will here in Maryland, how to make a will “foolproof” or as technically sound as possible, establishing an irrevocable trust or revocable trust in Maryland, or any other estate planning item, contact one of the estate planning attorneys at the Murphy Law Firm today by calling 240-219-1187.
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
