On 10 January 2020 David executed a will in terms of which he bequeaths the residue of his estate to his wife (Nicky) and should she predecease him the residue of his estate is to devolve upon his son Grant. On 1 July 2020 David and Nicky got divorced. David died on 15 October 2020 without having revoked the stated will. He is survived by his wife (Nicky) and his son (Grant). David's estate will devolve as follows: A). The residue will remain in his estate. B). His estate will be divided equally between his wife (Nicky) and his son (Grant). C). His son Grant will inherit the residue of his estate in terms of his will. D). His wife (Nicky) will inherit the residue of the estate in terms of his will.

On 10 January 2020 David executed a will in terms of which he bequeaths the residue of his estate to his wife (Nicky) and should she predecease him the residue of his estate is to devolve upon his son Grant. On 1 July 2020 David and Nicky got divorced. David died on 15 October 2020 without having revoked the stated will. He is survived by his wife (Nicky) and his son (Grant). David's estate will devolve as follows: A). The residue will remain in his estate. B). His estate will be divided equally between his wife (Nicky) and his son (Grant). C). His son Grant will inherit the residue of his estate in terms of his will. D). His wife (Nicky) will inherit the residue of the estate in terms of his will.

Similar questions

Sam and Eleanor Gaito purchased a home from Howard Frank Auman, Jr., in the spring of 2011. Auman had completed the construction of the house in November 2006. In the interim, three different parties had lived in the house for brief periods, but Auman had retained ownership. The last tenants, the Ashleys, experienced difficulties with the home’s air conditioning system. Repairs were attempted, but no effort was made to change the capacity of the air conditioning unit. When the Gaitos moved into the house in June 2011, they too had problems with the air conditioning. The system created only a ten-degree difference between the outside and inside temperatures. The Gaitos complained to Auman on a number of occasions, but extensive repairs failed to correct the cooling problem. In May 2014, the Gaitos brought an action against Auman, alleging that the purchase price of the home included central air conditioning and that Auman had breached the implied warranty of habitability. At trial, an…
Was it good for Jacoby, Meyers, and Koff to set up a general partnership for their Jacoby & Meyers law firm?
A mutual will cannot be unilaterally revoked after one of the parties has died. true or false
Little Switzerland Brewing Company was incorporated on January 28. On February 18, Ellison and Oxley were made directors of the company after they purchased some stock. Then on September 25, Ellison and Oxley signed stock subscription agreements to purchase five thousand shares each. Under the agreement, they both issued a note that indicated that they would pay for the stock “at their discretion.” Two years later in March, the board of directors passed a resolution canceling the stock subscription agreements of Ellison and Oxley. The creditors of Little Switzerland brought suit against Ellison and Oxley to recover the money owed under the subscription agreements. Are Ellison and Oxley liable? Why or why not?
For a decedent who has left a last will and testament, which of the following correctly state issues that may have to be proved in the probate proceeding? Whether the will was validly executed Whether the will disposes of all probate property Whether the decedent's gross estate exceeds the applicable exclusion amount Whether any trusts described in the will are entitled to the marital or charitable deduction
Under our NCC, an heir may institute an action for rescission of a rescissible contract in his capacity as a representative or successor-in-interest of a person who suffers from lesion or of the creditor who is defrauded. Suppose, however, that it can be established that the decedent, during his lifetime, entered into a contract with another in order to defraud him of his legitime, can he institute an action for the rescission of such contract after the death of the decedent?
A married couple with two children owns a property that they have homesteaded. If the wife dies, what estate will the husband have in the property? a life estate, with their children as remaindermen a fee simple estate No estate: the children will inherit the house fee simple. It depends on what was in the wife's witt.
Skip and Jack are the shareholders of the Blue Fish Event Corporation. Skip and Jack regularly put on classy events on or near the beach, so they have a special insurance policy to protect their assets. Business has been slow as fewer large beach weddings are taking place, so Skip and Jack use a large fan to blow down and damage most of their décor assets, some of which were personal assets of Skip and Jack, to collect the insurance benefits. (a) Assuming their acts are proven, will a court allow Skip and Jack to recover the insurance money? (b) Is this a situation where the corporate veil may be pierced? Why or why not? (c) What would it mean for Skip and Jack if the corporate veil is pierced in this situation?
Grace Peterson, a never-married and childless woman, then age seventy-four, asked Chester Gustafson, a Minneapolis attorney, to draw a will for her. Gustafson, who had also probated Peterson’s sister’s estate, drew this first will and six subsequent wills and codicils free of charge because he claimed that she had no money to pay for his services. Over the five-year period during which Gustafson redrew Peterson’s will, an increasing amount of property was devised to Gustafson’s children, until, finally, the seventh will so devised Peterson’s entire estate. Peterson, however, hardly knew the children except from several chance encounters ten years before. She died without ever having changed the seventh will, and Gustafson, who was named as executor, now seeks to have the will admitted to probate. Discuss whether the seventh will should be probated.
CCS Pty Ltd is registered with Mira and Aaron as its directors. CCS Pty Ltd hasissued five shares, with the following persons owning one each: Mira, Aaron, Ryan(Mira's son), Janice (Aaron's daughter) and Marilyn (Aaron's friend). CS Pty Ltdoperates a business that manutactures and sells widgetsFor each of the following developments, explain whether the shareholders and/ordirectors would be personally liable to the landlord, NAB Bank, Janice or AcmeComputers Pty Ltd.(d)CCS Pty Ltd enters into a lease for new premises where the business is to beheadquartered.CCS Pty Ltd borrows $100 000 from NAB Bank on an unsecured basis. Mirapersonally guarantees the repayment of the loan.CCS Pty Ltd purchases a block of land from Janice for $500 000 to build anew warehouse. CCS Pty Ltd grants Janice a mortgage over the land equal tothe $500 000 purchase price.CCS Pty Ltd purchases several computers from Acme Computers Pty Ltd.One third of the purchase price is paid on delivery and the balance is…
Answer with reference to Australian legislation please. 1. Kestrel Pty Ltd (Kestrel) is a small family company which operates a business breeding kestrels, eagles, falcons and other large birds of prey. Kim, Kourtney and Khloe are all siblings and the only directors of Kestrel and each owns 25 ordinary shares. Clause 15 of the constitution of Kestrel provides that Kim, Kourtney and Khloe shall be directors of Kestrel at all times. Late last year Kim had a massive fight with the rest of the family and now Kourtney and Khloe won’t speak to her and don’t want her to have anything to do with the company.At a recent board meeting, Kourtney and Khloe passed the following resolution(Kim voted against the resolution):Kestrel Pty Ltd (ACN 123 456 789) Written resolution Share Issue Resolved that: As Kestrel Pty Ltd requires additional capital to purchase more inventory, Kestrel Pty Ltd shall issue 25 ordinary shares to Kourtney and 25 ordinary shares to Khloe in consideration of…
Benjamin is a widower who has two married children, Edward and Patricia. Patricia has two children, Perry and Paul. Edward has no children. Benjamin dies, and his typewritten will leaves all his property equally to his children, Edward and Patricia, and provides that should a child predecease him, the grandchildren are to take per stirpes. The will was witnessed by Patricia and by Benjamin's lawyer, and it was signed by Benjamin in their presence. Patricia has predeceased Benjamin. Edward claims the will is invalid. Is the will valid or invalid? What would the distribution of Benjamin's estate be if the will was invalid? What would it be if it was valid?