New Jersey has enacted a harmless error rule provision in its probate code, and courts have liberally applied the substantial compliance doctrine when probating defective wills.
The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated digitization of estate planning in the United States, leading some states to adopt temporary electronic will statutes and others to permanently adjust their formal requirements for wills. This shift is reflected in the growing adoption of the Uniform Electronic Wills Act across the country since its introduction in 2019. However, there remain important concerns concerning the usage of electronic wills.
The Colorado Court of Appeal adds clarifies the responses available to formal probate petitions. What impact does this have for practitioners opening proceedings?
Colorado adopted the harmless error rule into its Probate Code in 1994. Since then, some cases have covered state court’s application of this statute, defining what makes an error “harmless.”
Texas has historically been a conservative, strict compliance jurisdiction concerning wills formalities. However, legislative, as opposed to jurisprudential developments have granted courts greater leeway in probating defective wills, including a limited substantial compliance provision and a new scrivener’s error rule.
What are the limits on testamentary freedom in Canada? Testamentary freedom is a fundamental right within the private law of succession, but it is not entirely unmitigated. Courts may consider a will’s violation of public policy for reasons of discrimination, immorality, and illegality. This article discusses some such examples.
New York is a strict compliance jurisdiction; mere substantial compliance with statutory requirements when executing wills typically won’t cut it. Nonetheless courts have repeatedly found flexible solutions when applying this standard.