David Fowler Johnson (Winstead PC): Court Affirmed Trial Court’s Reformation Of A Will To Omit The Word “Personal” From The Term “Property” In A Residuary Clause (March 15, 2021)

David Fowler Johnson, of Winstead PC, has made available for download his article, “Court Affirmed Trial Court’s Reformation Of A Will To Omit The Word “Personal” From The Term “Property” In A Residuary Clause,” published in JDSUPRA. The article begins as follows:

In Odom v. Coleman, a brother and a sister sued each other regarding their father’s estate. No. 01-19-00669-CV, 2020 Tex. App. LEXIS 9551 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] December 8, 2020, no pet.). The dispute centered on whether the father’s will should be reformed pursuant to Texas Estates Code Section 255.451(a)(3) that permits a court to modify or reform a will if “necessary to correct a scrivener’s error in the terms of the will, even if unambiguous, to conform with the testator’s intent,” which must be established by clear and convincing evidence. Id. The will contained a residuary clause that devised “personal property” to the son and then to the daughter. A strict reading of the will meant that the decedent’s real property would not be included in the residuary clause and would pass by intestancy. The son sued to reform the will to omit the word “personal” in the residuary clause. The trial court ruled for the son and the daughter appealed.

To view the full article, click here: “Court Affirmed Trial Court’s Reformation Of A Will To Omit The Word “Personal” From The Term “Property” In A Residuary Clause”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s