Will leaving estate to me by my mom was rendered invalid due to original will being a contract. Do I have a claim for taking care of mom?

The attorney who wrote the first will also probated the estate when my dad passed. I have no idea why probate was needed being the property was owned jointly as well as their bank account. No matter. My mom had a new will drafted a few weeks after my dad passed naming me as executor by the same attorney. Why bother writing up a new will if the old was valid. He could have simply wrote a codicil to the original one naming me executor. My mom didn't change anything at that time. She wrote new will a couple years ago naming me as beneficiary as well as executor. They are saying I won't executor either.

No, the new will explains why she is leaving her estate to me & excluding my bro. For taking care of her all those years w/o any compensation and because I had the greater financial need. It's not the wording of the new will - it is the fact that the original will is a joint & contractual will

No I didn't sign the will. I thought I had a competent attorney. The attorney & his wife signed it. The attornies are saying that the first will is takes precedence.

Every lawyer I've contacted since my only sibling decided to contest the will has stated that its a contractual will and takes presedence. Its state of IA.

Here is the wording "This being a Joint will, the same is *binding* on each of us and our successors, and the consideration for the making of this will is the promise and the execution of this will to the other. "

It also states the estate goes to the survivor -- I can't see anywhere where it states what the survivor should do with the property.

It does state what should be done in the event they both die at the same time

it states property should be divided between my brother & I equally if they both pass away at the same time.. It does not state anywhere what the survivor shoud do with the property when they pass

I found this link & I don't see any wording such as

"the survivor shall neither sell nor change the will as to this home farm." or anything like this - " After the death of the first of us to die, under no circumstances can the terms and conditions of the Last Will and Testament of either of us be changed in any respect by the survivor."

SEVENTH My husband, Royal Meyer [my wife, Norma Jean Meyer] and I have executed our Wills contemporaneously and in accordance with a common plan. The provisions of each will provide for reciprocal and other bequests that are made in fulfillment of this purpose. In consideration of such common plan we waive the right during our joint lives to alter or revoke this Will, in whole or in part, by Codicil or otherwise, without first giving notice in writing to the other. After the death of the first of us to die, under no circumstances can the terms and conditions of the Last Will and Testament of either of us be changed in any respect by the survivor.
Emphasis added.
The requisite intent is indicated in these two clauses of the couple’s wills, concerning how the residual property is to be disposed in the event that one predeceases the other. The terms of the wills require that the after the death of either of them, the residue of probate assets is to be devised and bequeathed to the surviving spouse, and upon the death of the surviving spouse, the residue of the surviving spouse’s estate is to be devised and bequeathed to their sons. Focusing specifically on the language contained in the provision of the wills entitled SEVENTH, this language has the effect of providing for the binding disposition of the surviving spouse’s residual property in a certain way, and therefore constitutes intent that the wills are to be construed as contractual. See Matter of Prehoda's Estate, 309 N.W.2d 516, (Iowa App.1981). Furthermore, the wills specifically state that the wills were executed contemporaneously and with a common plan. In consideration of the “common plan” they waived the rights to alter or revoke the wills once the other died.

http://itrl.idr.iowa.gov/mx/hm.asp?id=99700161

The joint will was made out in the 1960's . That was over 50 yrs ago but attorneys say that is the will which will be probated because it is a contractual will and the newer ones are invalid. Reason given - it was a joint and contractual will & they also mentioned IA's anti lapse statue which I looked up but I don't understand how that applies. Any help will be greatly appreciated. thank you

I've never heard of a will being interpreted as a contract. Did the attorneys tell you why it was a will and not a contract?

There are distinct signatory issues between the two. Wills are signed by whoever made them - husband, wife individually or collectively. They are notarized and witnessed, but those signatures don't make the witnesses or notaries party to a contract. They merely ATTEST to the fact that they've witnessed the testator/testatrix's (parties who made the will and expressed their intents for disposition of their assets) execution of the Will.

Contracts, on the other hand, identify in the first paragraph the individuals or entities who/which are entering into the contract, and each signs, individually if they're individual parties or by an authorized corporate officer if they're corporate entities. Contracts are also notarized and witnessed.

I really can't understand how a will can be a contract. UNLESS the explanation of why you're being made a beneficiary contains terms such as compensation for care. Did you sign the will in any capacity? Who drafted the second will? Is there a provision revoking any and all previous Wills?

Still, a will and a contract each serve different purposes. This just doesn't make any sense at all.

Can you explain what made the first will a contract vs being a regular will. Also since your father has already passed, did the first will have beneficiaries after him?