Question

Joaquin Page was 80 years old when he was released from the hospital with a life expectancy of only a few months. After he returned home, his daughter Kara Montoya, and his niece Bridget Wilkes, took care of him. Montoya and Wilkes both had good relationships with Page but did not have a good relationship with each other. Montoya lived approximately two hours away and so helped when she could make it to town. Page repeatedly asked Montoya to move in with him, even before he was sick, and often told Montoya that she should move in because the house would be hers someday. Page also told his other children and several friends that the home was going to belong to Montoya but that he did not want her to sell the home. Due to work and other commitments Montoya could not move to the family home.

Wilkes, who had lived next door to Page's significant property for the past twenty years, became friends with her uncle in the last two years of his life and then helped quite often when he became ill. Wilkes and her husband offered to buy the property from Page who refused to sell to them and shared with several friends that he was going to leave the property to Montoya and was angry that the Wilkes wanted to buy it. Page asked Wilkes to purchase a commercial will-drafting kit. Using it, he drafted a will on July 15, signed it, and had Wilkes's daughter and son-in-law sign as witnesses. Several witnesses would testify that Page remained stubborn and mentally alert until the day he died - one week later on July 22.

Page's July 15 will appointed Wilkes as executor and gave his entire estate to Wilkes. Wilkes was not in the room when the will was signed by Page or the witnesses. The will contained no other dispositions or gifts and did not leave anything to Montoya. According to Wilkes, the day before he died, he showed her the will and said that he had given Montoya every opportunity to come and live with him, but she had made no attempt to do so. Because of her failure to move in with him, Page stated that he wanted his property to stay in the family, and he also wanted his older sisters to be able to come and live there and for Wilkes to help care for them as well.

Identifying the Facts and Issues

Answer 1

The case represents a legal issue in family law, focusing on the validity of a last will and the importance of formal documentation in estate planning. Joaquin Page's verbal intentions to leave his property to Kara Montoya oppose his written will favoring Bridget Wilkes, resembling complications seen in historical cases like Kowalski and Thompson. A court would need to assess all evidence to determine the true intent behind the disposition of the property.

Step-by-step explanation:

The student's question relates to the interpretation of the last will and testament within the context of family law. The complexity arises from verbal commitments and the contrasting content of a written will. The scenario illustrates the legal challenges encountered when verbal promises do not align with the formalized intentions expressed in a will. Such cases often lead to disputes regarding the testator's intent, the validity of the will, potential undue influence, and the legal rights of the heirs.

Considering the given facts, Joaquin Page expressed a desire for Kara Montoya to inherit his home, but his formal will does not reflect this. The will instead leaves everything to Bridget Wilkes, who also serves as executor. The scenario is similar to the case involving Sharon Kowalski and Karen Thompson, where lack of formal legal recognition led to a prolonged legal battle. In both cases, legal processes had to reconcile the expressed wishes with formal legal documentation.

A court might consider the verbal commitments made by Page to Montoya, the circumstances surrounding the drafting and signing of the will, witness testimony, and the absence of Wilkes during the signing. The resolution of this dispute would need a careful analysis of the evidentiary value of these verbal and written expressions of intent concerning the property.