I've heard if all children aren't mentioned in a will, they can contest it?

2ndBest, thank you for sharing insight into what must have been an extended period of hostility and vindictiveness by your MIL, and feelings of hurt and rejection by all by the favored son.

I'm sure it's hard on the unfavored siblings, and can understand their desire to receive some funds from the sale of the house.

However, my understanding of the in terrorem clause is that it's not upset by litigation, i.e., suing isn't going to change anything or reverse their exclusion.

I'm sure your willingness to challenge the will on behalf of the others is generous and good natured, but legally I question whether your husband does have "standing" to challenge on behalf of his siblings.

There are procedures such as "next friend" appointments for allowing a parent (generally) to sue on behalf of a minor, but I'm not sure legally how an adult could sue on behalf of his adult, mentally sane, siblings. I think the issue might turn on whether or not he has what's known as "standing" in legal terminology to represent them. The question could be asked why they can't sue on behalf of themselves.

I'm just saying that I think a good frank discussion with an attorney should be had before any funds are expended in litigation, especially if the in terrorem clause is upheld.

What you should discuss with an attorney are the grounds on which that kind of clause can be reversed. That might turn on case rather than statutory law, and access to an online legal database would likely be necessary. So a law firm would be necessary to evaluate your husbands and sibling's positions and advise whether a suit would be a waste of time and money, or if there is precedent for having reversed an in terrorem provision.

Palmtrees - I would want my legacy to be that I treated people with kindness and respect and most importantly that I loved my husband and my son. I would be truely horrified if anyone attached a dollars and cents figure to that as a means to determine its value.

Wow 2ndbest, your MIL was truly mentally off. A narcissist definitely but probably something deeper there. My mother was almost as bad but not quite. What I notice is their ability to hold a grudge forever and punish those who go against their wishes.

I am so sorry for your husband. I know personally how much this hurts, so be very kind to him. And remember the son who did take the estate is the apple that did not fall far from the tree. Very sad situation, my heart aches for you all.

Rain mom, what you said about splitting your inheritance with your middle brother really hit home with me. My mother put my brother as beneficiary on about 700,000.00 worth of bank accounts. He flipped out when he saw her accounts and told her he was giving me half of everything so make it easy on him and just add me to the accounts. She did what he asked just a month before she died. He convinced her that he would have a big tax problem, yada, yada. And she did it for him.But you are right, I have had no peace as to her intentions and why she would be so mean and cruel to me.

Mom was a narcissist. I was the scapegoat. I had to distance myself for emotional reasons and this was her punishment. As my brother told me, "mom is into pout and punish".

I will have to live with the notion that my mother didn't love me enough to make sure I was part of the family and got an equal share.

I don't agree that people should do whatever they want with their assets. We all leave a legacy to our families. What would you want yours to be?

Rainmom and GardenArtist - yes, of course there is a lot more to this story, but for the sake of brevity I didn't go into it all. I'll give you just one example of how she operated so you get an idea of the kind of person she was. Her favorite (youngest) son got married and all the family gathered in a small town for his wedding. Fav son's 4 siblings were 12-20 years older than him, and all had children of their own by this time. We along with our 2 young kids drove almost 1800 miles to attend. Our daughter and two of her cousins were flower girls. We, my husband's siblings and their families, plus his parents and MIL's sister all stayed in the only little motel in the small town. So while we were at the reception after the wedding ceremony the bride's mother asked us why we didn't show up at the brunch she had put on for all the family that morning. We were stunned to hear about it, and told her we had no idea there was a brunch that we were invited to. She said she had told MIL to invite all of her kids, grandkids, etc. to come to the brunch. MIL failed to tell ANY of her children they were invited. So here this woman, mother of the bride, had worked hard to make a nice family gathering and all that food went to waste. She was terribly hurt that none of us had shown up - that is until she found out MIL deliberately failed to extend the invitation to any of us. She was livid and just couldn't believe a mother could be so cold-hearted to all of her children who had come all that way to celebrate their brother's wedding. Then at the reception MIL refused to have her and their dad's picture taken with the rest of the family. So there's just one small example of many very hurtful things this nasty woman did to her kids.

Looking back, I now believe she had a mental illness of some sort. Her older sister was a diagnosed schizophrenic. MIL was extremely selfish, greedy and vindictive. She had taken in her husband's brother into their home as he was dying of cancer, and with a couple of her neighbors as witnesses, she had him sign a Will naming her as the sole beneficiary. She got all his money, which was quite a sum, after he died. Then his 3 siblings found out about it and contested the will and the money got clawed back. She had to share it equally with them. She was an evil, greedy and hateful person. In all the years (my husband and I have been married for 39 yrs) I have never known her to be on good terms with more than one of her children at any given time. Really it was common knowledge that the only child that mattered to her was the youngest, but when she turned him against her after his father's death, she then transferred her favor to the next youngest son, who she ultimately willed everything to. The "falling out" was when their father died and MIL told the funeral home, when asked what she wanted them to do with his ashes, said "I don't care - just throw them away!!" Youngest son was devastated and appalled at his mother's callous treatment of his father, who he had been quite close to. He was so much younger than the rest, that he was raised more like an only child, since the others were in college before he started school. Anyway, from that day forward, favorite son never spoke to his mother again and second-youngest son moved up to fill the position of "favorite".

My husband's sister, a kind and good-hearted person lived near MIL and really tried to do all she could to help her mother, but her efforts were always met with conflict. She is the one that flew with her mother to be with favorite son 5 states away, which was MIL's dying wish. She is the one I feel sorry for because she is a good person and tried so hard to keep her mother happy, but to no avail. She sat in her mother's driveway for hours, going to the door every so often to knock hoping her mother would answer. Then when she noticed a police car driving by she finally left, assuming her mother had called the police. This rift was over a decision to celebrate Thanksgiving with her mother the day after in order to accommodate her son's wife's plans to have Thxgvg dinner with her own family that year. MIL held a grudge about this the rest of her life, never speaking to her offending children nor grandchildren again.

Yes, there was a clause in the Will stating that if anyone challenged it they get nothing. My husband and I, because we are wealthy in our own right, were willing to be the ones challenging the will on behalf of the others. Unless there was a lot of life insurance, which I doubt, the only asset would be the house, valued at about $400 - $500k. So the amount for each sibling wouldn't be a large amount, but it is a lot to them. However I think with the Trust in place the estate is locked up tight. I think this brother "worked" his mentally disturbed mother to his advantage. But proving that is a longshot. So we will just let it be, and try to help the other siblings get over their wounds inflicted by their mother. I am told that favorite son is now giving away items to neighbors, strangers, anyone but family. It is sad, but even sadder is a mother of 5 that died, with no funeral service, no obituary, not even a mention. Poof. Gone. All that's left of her is the big grin on her favorite son's face that managed to tolerate her long enough to get his pot of gold. So there's of course MUCH more to the story, but that is the gist of it.

My great-grandmother lived with my great aunt for decades, before and after my great-aunt's marriage in her 50's. My grandmother did not visit, did not care for her mother, and nursed a grudge from before my great-grandfather's death. My GGM passed away and left all to my great aunt. Grandmother promptly hired an attorney and fought for "her half". Well, many months later, she won her case and received 50% of an estate (reduced by legal fees) and paid about 33% for my grandmother's legal fees. Rather than enjoy her now less than 13% left of the estate, my grandmother spent the rest of her life complaining that her sister (great-aunt) never called or wrote or visited her in nursing home. Unless there was a HUGE estate, and no claims by Medicaid that may still pierce the veil of a trust, usually the only winners are the lawyers. And multiple sibs reduces each share even further.

Jude, that reminded me back ages ago when I worked in a law office, the attorney would tell his client to include the names of all the children even if the client didn't want them to have anything.... the attorney said to at least give the child one dollar. That way the child can't say he/she wasn't in the Will :)

What a great story! Thanks for sharing it with us.

Oh Jude, that's Awesome! I'm glad he thought ahead and planned it all out that 2ay, PERFECT!

Great story, Jude. Thank you for sharing it.

Rain mom when I lived in a different area the vultures descended on a lovely lovely older man (my domino partner at the time). He was 90 odd and simply put he was dying from a broken heart. His wife died the day after their 70th anniversary and he simply lost the will to go on. he had no children his siblings were all dead and then the nephews and nieces came out of the woodwork. Whilst we the local community had always looked after him since his wife died. Between us we fed him did his laundry and cleaned for him - all for free because in his time he had paid forward too. Then in they swooped - we weren't allowed to bring him apple crumble, or plum cake or cottage pie. The jars of home made jams were left on the doorstep or put in the bin. No-one except family was allowed to visit and while at the time there was no law we all knew he must be very very lonely and missing his friends.

He was taken into hospital (where we could all visit - Hilarious when we held a domino tournament in his private room!) He rallied for a while then eventually he died on the very day his wife had two years previously.

The funeral was incredibly simple give that we knew he had wanted the two black horses and to be 'walked out' of the village he had spent his entire life in. It didn't matter .... the streets were lined with people and while it was two black cars it was dignified. The funeral was standing room only and although he had always wanted to be buried next to his wife the family arranged a cremation.

The villagers were in uproar but of course nothing they could do. As you can imagine there was a sizeable estate and come the day of the will reading, the family all arrived at the solicitor's office alongside one other person - his best friend of about 40 years, who had been there thick and thin for his buddy.

I can't remember how many nieces and nephews there were but about 8. Apparently they were all given an envelope as was his friend.

His friend's letter said something along the lines of...... You have always been there for me and we have been through good and bad and come through smiling and I thank you for that. I want you to have my cars. You can sell them and enjoy your life or keep them and enjoy your life but whatever you do enjoy your life....remember our motto? You're a long time dead! Goodbye my friend

He had owned 5 perfectly restored vintage cars worth an astronomical amount which he and this friend had restored together.

To his nieces and nephews. Inside the envelope was a crisp £10 note and a letter that said something like. This money should be taken to the pet shop to buy food to feed the birds. You are all vultures and will not benefit one more penny from my estate. You have never visited in 30 years and it was too late after the death of my wife when you couldn't even move yourselves to come to her funeral.

The rest of the estate was sold in its entirety and the money given to 3 favourite charities - the amount? oh a minor amount really ....about £2 million!

They had no redress and no right to contend because a) he had left them money and b) had left a letter. That didn't stop them. They contended en masse and to the vast amusement of the village LOST en masse

OhJude - I get it, the letter. But when it comes down to it, I suspect most people know why. I don't mean to suggest it's always the non-beneficiaries fault - some people can just be plain old mean and a will is their way of having the last word. At one point my mom planned to leave my oldest brother out of her will. My middle brother and I agreed that if that happened we would split whatever we were left to give our brother an even share. However, regardless of us doing that my oldest brother still would have known our mothers intention and she would have made her point. Money attached to the emotional baggage that comes with death and final intentions seems to bring out the worst in people.

For what it is worth, when Mum decided for a whole host of reasons (not the least being the shame he brought on her and the thievery he committed from her) to cut her son from the will the solicitor said she MUST write a letter to explain why - which she did. When she asked why he said it was to avoid contention.

GardenArtist - the thing I'm wondering the most about is that the first will had a single beneficiary. Then it was changed - 25 years ago to a different single beneficiary. What is the point of contention? The sole beneficiary or THIS sole beneficiary? Since this will has been in existence 25 years I think undue influence will be tough to prove. The whole thing seems odd, Imo.

RainMom, I agree that there's probably a long backstory to this situation if the Will was changed 25 years ago to exclude all but the one heir. I think there's much more to this situation than meets the eye.

You state that both Wills and a Trust were in existence, and that the house was funded into the Trust. Was the house the only asset in the Trust, or were other assets, including financial ones, funded into the Trust as well?

The Will should be a Pour-Over Will, linking to the Trust, which establishes who the heirs are. You should try to get a copy of the Trust, to determine if in fact it only covers the house or covers more of her assets, as well as to confirm your understanding of the named heirs.

I was wondering since the Will was changed so long ago whether the Trust was created at the same time, or later. If later, the Will should have been redone to create a Pour-Over Will.

If you do file suit to contest the bequests, I think you'll have to prove undue influence as the basis for your challenge. Start gathering data that supports that premise.

When you get a copy of the Trust, and the Pour-Over Will, read it to see if there's an in terrorem clause, which provides that anyone who contests the will will either (a) inherit a limited amount, or (b) inherit nothing.

Until you see the Trust, you can't conclude for sure that the bequests are as you've written in your post. It's worth it to check it out.

I am probably in the minority here but I think a person has a right - providing they were competent at the time the decision was made - to will their assets to whom ever they choose. It may seem wrong to those left out, and perhaps even to the sole beneficiary but the money was hers to do with what she wished. If people were nice to her and did things to help her hopefully it was what they wanted to do or felt was the right thing to do, rather than doing it for a slice of the inheritance. Unless other promises or arrangments were made she owed no one and no one owed her. Also, unless the will was recently changed as in once mom arrived at the sons home or if there is reasonable cause to suspect him of unduly pressuring mom to name him - then it will be a bitter pill to swallow. It does say something - only the family knows what - that it seems it was never moms intention to split the money among all or even a couple of the siblings - as her will prior to the change also only named a sole beneficiary until the "falling out". Would he be in the doghouse as well if the will still named him? As for giving away her things and not calling siblings...I'm thinking there is probably a back story to dysfunctional family dynamics that are not included in this post.

If all Mom had was the house and it isn't very valuable, it may not be worth it to go through the stress of contesting it. Didn't Mom have a lawyer helping her with the will? I would think a lawyer would have worded it so it couldn't be contested. Oh well. I think I would at least consult a lawyer before deciding about contesting the will.

I feel very, very sorry for your husband and his siblings growing up in such a dysfunctional family. And I would channel most of my anger and disappointment toward MIL. The son she was with when she died was also a victim of this unhealthy situation.

Calling one person and asking them to call others seems perfectly reasonable to me. When my husband died, frankly I don't remember who I called. Not each of our five kids, I know that. I counted on them to spread the word quickly. I was a little overwhelmed at the moment, ya know?

You feel he ingratiated himself to her by whatever means. Well, maybe. But the true fault her is a mother who would let herself be so influenced by one child she'd disinherit the others. It sounds like this was her personality for decades before she when to visit this son.

Who inherits is a legal matter. See a lawyer.

I think it would be a terrible shame if MIL's dysfunctional behavior is allowed to drive the children apart at this juncture. They were all victims.

I agree with Pam above, you need to see an Attorney. This is way too complex.

You hire a lawyer and contest both the Will and the Trust. It won't be cheap. There are time limits to do this, so see a lawyer ASAP