Estate of Adams

California Court of Appeal Feb 6, 1957 No. Civ. 21927Published

Before: Moore

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that Social Security lump-sum death benefits, which discharge an estate's primary obligation for burial expenses, constitute an asset of the estate that must be included in the 'appraised inventory value' for purposes of determining which testamentary distribution clause applies.

Issues

Whether Social Security death benefits are includible in the 'appraised inventory value' of a decedent's estate for purposes of interpreting a will's distribution provisions.

Disposition. reversed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“the estate has an interest in such insurance and must include its value to the extent that the proceeds are payable to or for the benefit of the estate.”

“inasmuch as the estate must be the eventual beneficiary of the Social Security insurance payment, the right to that payment (the “policy”) is essentially an asset of the estate at the time of the decedent’s demise.”

MOORE, P. J.

George Martin Adams deceased February 19, 1955. Petitioner Walter J. Held was duly qualified as the executor of decedent’s estate. Upon a trial of the executor’s petition for a determination of “the rights of all persons to said estate and all interests therein and determine to whom distribution of said estate should be made” the court below entered its decree that decedent left a will “that distribution of the estate shall be under the provisions of paragraph Seventh of said will.” Whereupon the decree ordered that the estate was to be distributed to Elizabeth Adams Strahan and Francis Adams, children of decedent, share and share alike.

The controversy at the trial was, whether the provisions of Article Sixth or those of Article Seventh should control the distribution of the estate. Because the court ordered distribution to be made to the persons named in Article Seventh, Robert Held, named alternate legatee in Article Sixth, demands reversal of the decree on the ground that by virtue of the contents of Article Sixth, the entirety of the estate belongs to him.

The two articles in dispute are as follows:

“Sixth: Provided that the appraised inventory value of my estate shall at the time of my death be less than Fifteen Thousand Dollars, then all of the provisions set forth in paragraph Fifth, (a), (b), and (c), above, shall be of no effect, and my said estate shall, after the payment of debts and expenses of administration, be distributed as follows:

“ (a) To Millie Held, my sister-in-law, now residing at 915 [sic] Oxford Street, Berkeley, California, Five Thousand ($5,000.00) Dollars;

“Provided, that should the said Millie Held predecease me, then said Five Thousand ($5,000.00) Dollars shall go to her son, Robert Held, by right of representation.

“(b) The residue of said estate, after the payment of

[321]

the aforesaid sum of Five Thousand ($5,000.00) Dollars, shall be distributed in equal shares to the following persons:

“Elizabeth Adams Strahan, now residing at 2861 Club Drive, Los Angeles, California, my daughter.

Estate of Adams

AI Brief

MOORE, P. J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief