Law of Wills, 2016A

property that a settlor may appoint to himself or his executors, the property could have been
devoted to fulfilling debts or a widow’s “special interests which should be recognized.” Sullivan v.
Burkin, supra at 869, 460 N.E.2d 572. We see no reason not to adopt the same reasoning for
purposes of payment of a child obligation debt, and the defendants offer none.
Question Four (Discussion Omitted)
So ordered.
Notes and Questions
1. Parents are legally obligated to provide financial support for their children. Therefore,
noncustodial parents must pay child support. Nonetheless, that duty ends when the parent dies.
Since children do not have a right to inherit from their parents, their parents can disinherit them.
However, should parents be permitted to disinherit minor and disabled children? What are the pros
and cons of the majority approach which allows parents to disinherit their children regardless of
their youth or disability?
2. What are the pros and cons of the Uniform Probate Code’s approach to the omitted child
problem?
3. Should parents be required to state reasons why they are disinheriting their children?
4. In light of the Hodel decision discussed in Chapter Seven, is Louisiana’s forced heir statute
unconstitutional? Is there a difference between prohibiting a person’s property from being disposed
of under the intestacy system and requiring that a portion of the person’s property be disposed of
under the intestacy system?
5. In all jurisdictions the spouse is entitled to a share of the decedent’s estate whether he or she
leaves a will or dies intestate. Therefore, a person cannot disinherit his or her spouse. In light of that
fact, should a person be able to disinherit his or her minor and disabled children?
8.5 Disinheritance by Operation of Law (Slayer Rule)
On August 26, 1989, Erik and Lyle Menendez gunned down their parents in the den of their
mansion in Beverly Hills. Their father, Jose, was shot in the head from point-blank range and their
mother, Kitty, was shot multiple times while she attempted to escape. The prosecutor claimed that
the young men committed the murders in order to inherit their parents’ 14 million dollar estate. The
brothers admitted to killing their parents, but maintained that their actions were the result of years
of abuse. Eventually, the brothers were convicted of two counts each of first-degree murder and
conspiracy to commit murder and sentenced to life in prison without parole. Because they were
convicted of killing their parents the brothers will not be able to inherit their parents’ estate. The law
provides barriers to the child being able to inherit from his or her parent. In essence, the child is
disinherited by the operation of law. A main barrier to inheritance is a slayer statute. The typical
slayer statute provides that a person, including a child, who intentionally kills another person cannot
inherit from that person’s estate. The purpose of the slayer statute is to prevent a person from
benefitting from his or her criminal act. The following is an example of a typical slayer statute.
388