Law of Wills, 2016A

Charles returned to the Los Angeles area where they lived and held themselves out as husband and
wife until Charles’ death. They had one child, Kimberly Hafner, born December 10, 1964.
On September 27, 1973, Charles was seriously injured in an automobile accident which left him with
permanent physical disabilities and brain damage that rendered him incapable of employment.
During the nine months in the hospital and his subsequent recovery period, Helen faithfully
attended to his needs as his wife and continued to do so for some nine years until his death.
Charles and Helen accumulated approximately $69,000 in hospital and doctor bills as a result of the
accident. Those bills were not paid until Charles’s personal injury action was settled for $900,000, in
1975, which netted decedent $600,000 after attorney’s fees. Helen and her attorney, Charles Weldon,
were appointed as Charles’s co-conservators in 1975. The personal injury settlement was placed in
conservatorship accounts and administered under court supervision. The conservatorship assets
were subsequently transferred to Charles’ probate administrator following Charles’s death.
Charles Hafner died intestate on December 25, 1982, leaving an estate appraised at $416,472.40; his
entire probate estate consists of the remainder of the proceeds of his personal injury settlement.
Joan apparently learned of Charles’s personal injury in 1974; she was not able financially to visit him
following his accident. Joan learned of Charles’s death a few days after Christmas, 1982; she did not
attend his funeral and did not know where it was.
Petitions for letters of administration were filed by Helen and by Joan on January 21 and February
14, 1983, respectively. By stipulation the competing petitions were taken off calendar and a bank was
appointed administrator. The bank administrator is not a party to this appeal.
Helen filed a petition for determination of entitlement to estate (former § 1080), claiming to be the
surviving wife of Charles and seeking to have the probate court determine the persons entitled to
share in the distribution of Charles’s estate.
Appellants (Joan and the three daughters) filed a response to the petition and a statement of interest,
asserting their respective claims to a share of Charles’ estate, as his surviving spouse and children,
pursuant to section 221. Kimberly Hafner, a child of Charles, also filed a statement of interest in the
state.
Appellants claimed that they, together with Kimberly, should succeed to Charles’ entire estate under
section 221, and that even if Helen were found to be a good faith putative spouse the court should,
under equitable principles, divide the estate among them.
Pursuant to stipulations without prejudice by Joan and Helen, acting through their attorneys and
filed in the cause, Helen was awarded a family allowance of $1,800 per month from and after the
date of Charles’s death. Later, and commencing November 1, 1983, a family allowance of $1,800 per
month was ordered payable to Helen and a family allowance of $400 per month was ordered payable
to Joan, both until trial of the petition for determination of heirship. Such stipulations were
expressly without prejudice to either Joan or Helen in their respective positions in the controversy
and with the provision that all such allowances should be charged in full against such person’s
distributive share of the estate, and would not otherwise be reimbursed.
80