Interpretation of Wills under Trusts and Estates

11 Jul 2025 --
0 Comments

Interpretation of Wills

Interpretation of wills refers to the process by which courts determine the meaning and intent of the language used by a testator (the person who made the will) to distribute their property after death. Since wills often contain ambiguous or unclear language, courts step in to clarify the testator’s true intent.

🔑 Key Principles in Will Interpretation

1. Primary Goal: Testator’s Intent

The most important rule in interpreting a will is to ascertain and give effect to the testator's intent at the time the will was made.

Courts use the language of the will, but also look beyond the text if necessary to understand what the testator intended.

2. Plain Meaning Rule

Courts first try to interpret the words according to their ordinary meaning.

If the language is clear, courts will not rewrite the will or add new terms.

⚖️ Case Law: In re Estate of Linton, 210 N.Y. 455 (1914)
Court held that if the language is unambiguous, the court must follow the plain meaning of the words, even if the result is harsh.

3. Ambiguity in Wills

Patent ambiguity: Obvious from the face of the will (e.g., contradictory terms).

Latent ambiguity: Ambiguity arises when applying the will to external facts (e.g., a gift to “my cousin John,” but the testator had multiple cousins named John).

When ambiguity exists, courts may look at extrinsic evidence (outside the will) to determine intent.

⚖️ Case Law: Estate of King, 72 Cal.2d 320 (1969)
Allowed extrinsic evidence to resolve latent ambiguities to effectuate testator’s intent.

4. Rules of Construction

If the will is ambiguous or silent, courts use interpretative rules, such as:

Ejusdem Generis: When general words follow specific words, the general words are limited to the same class as the specifics.
(Example: “cars, trucks, motorcycles, and other vehicles” means vehicles similar to those listed.)

Noscitur a Sociis: A word is known by the company it keeps; words are interpreted in context.

Expressio Unius est Exclusio Alterius: The expression of one thing implies the exclusion of others.

5. Avoiding Intestacy

Courts prefer to interpret wills to avoid intestacy (where property is distributed according to statute rather than the will).

⚖️ Case Law: Matter of Estate of Jackson, 289 N.Y. 282 (1943)
Court interpreted a will to give effect to a bequest rather than let property pass by intestacy.

6. Incorporation by Reference

A will can incorporate outside documents if they existed at the time the will was executed and the will clearly refers to them.

⚖️ Case Law: Matter of Estate of Halter, 21 Cal.App.4th 1507 (1994)
Upheld incorporation of a list describing personal property if referred to clearly.

7. Avoiding Forfeiture Clauses

If a clause would cause a beneficiary to forfeit a gift due to minor or accidental breaches, courts may interpret the will to avoid forfeiture where consistent with intent.

8. Latent vs Patent Ambiguity

Patent ambiguity: On the face of the will, e.g., “I give my house to my brother, Sarah.”

Latent ambiguity: Hidden until applying facts, e.g., “I give $10,000 to my nephew John,” when there are two nephews named John.

In patent ambiguity, courts may exclude extrinsic evidence; in latent ambiguity, they allow it.

9. Specific vs General Gifts

Specific gifts refer to a particular item or property (e.g., “my diamond ring”).

General gifts are payable from the general assets of the estate (e.g., “$10,000”).

If a specific gift is not in the estate, the gift fails unless the will provides otherwise.

Summary Table

Principle	Description	Key Case
Testator’s Intent	Courts seek to give effect to intent	Estate of Linton
Plain Meaning Rule	Ordinary meaning controls if clear	Estate of Linton
Ambiguity (Latent & Patent)	Allows extrinsic evidence for latent ambiguities	Estate of King
Avoid Intestacy	Courts interpret wills to avoid intestacy	Estate of Jackson
Incorporation by Reference	External documents may be incorporated	Estate of Halter