Oral Wills (Regarding xtcxtc)

[GoddessLSD-XTC]

As U know, Alan Woods (xtcxtc), who financially supported this site, had an oral agreement to fund this site long-term, like after his death?

It might be too late to contest his Will or put in a claim but if it is not too late, would Bluelight have a claim?

I had the same problem: I made an oral contract, which is valid in Arizona, to split the sale of a property I gave a friend a tip on (minus his costs). He got the property (worth $250,000 on a $10,000 investment in property tax liens) but died shortly thereafter (car/pedestrian accident) and I never discussed it with his wife after he died. She's dead now too and his daughter owns all of it.

 

[Ormus]

unfortunately at common law there's something called the 'statute of wills', which has certain general requirements for a bequest to be binding at death, including being in writing and signed by two disinterested witnesses. there are ways around it- if he had written down in longhand somewhere "I will always fund bluelight and expect my estate to fund bluelight for fifty years after my death", and signed and dated it, it could be considered a "holographic" codicil, which would be valid to submit to probate. But I doubt any of the admins has a memo like that lying around.

I don't know the specific arrangements that alan left his assets in, but I would bet money (ha) that a significant amount is in trust to specifically avoid probate and taxes- in which case there's no will to challenge, and a challenge against the trust would only benefit his intestate heirs.

Your situation is slightly different- an oral inter-vivos contract can be valid, but the trick is proving it. If you could have proved that contract to a court's satisfaction, you may have been able to put in a claim against your friend's estate.

Trying to bind Alan's estate to his wish to care for bluelight in the long term is basically impossible unless he explicitly provided for us. So if you care, kick a few bucks BL's way.

 

[Banquo]

laws regarding will requirements and the number of witnesses needed, etc., vary by locality. (some states in the U.S. do not require witnesses.) as pointed out though, there is a strong tradition requiring that wills be set out in writing. i'm not aware of any place that will enforce an oral will. it sorta makes sense when you think about it.

 

[Coolio]

What about a textual contract made over the internet in email, forum, PM, or IM?

 

[Mariposa]

Banquo - in very rare circumstances (mostly sailors or military personnel on their deathbeds) an oral will can be valid. In my own experience, though (and I have witnessed hundreds of wills due to my former occupation) I have never seen anything like this hold up.

I've seen provisions in wills and intervivos trusts that automatically invalidate a holographic codicil or redraft of will. I am not certain this is true where Alan's estate is being administered, but testamentary capacity (the ability to understand the ramifications of signing a will or trust) is assumed to be intact unless evidence is provided to the contrary.

Let's abstain from grasping at legal straws and donate to keep Bluelight going. Given that I am not a member of the Bar or its equivalent in Australia or anywhere (nor is anyone who's posted in this thread AFAIK) retained to represent Bluelight, I would suggest that your efforts be placed toward fundraising and donation.

 

[Mariposa]

I had the same problem: I made an oral contract, which is valid in Arizona, to split the sale of a property I gave a friend a tip on (minus his costs). He got the property (worth $250,000 on a $10,000 investment in property tax liens) but died shortly thereafter (car/pedestrian accident) and I never discussed it with his wife after he died. She's dead now too and his daughter owns all of it.

Good/marketable title might not have existed in this case, Goddess. I hope you will be more careful to get things in writing. Proving the intent of the dead is even harder than discerning the intent of the living.

 

[Ormus]

I've seen provisions in wills and intervivos trusts that automatically invalidate a holographic codicil or redraft of will. I am not certain this is true where Alan's estate is being administered, but testamentary capacity (the ability to understand the ramifications of signing a will or trust) is assumed to be intact unless evidence is provided to the contrary.

Generally a valid repudiation of wills (including codicils) absolutely have to postdate the alleged codicil. You might be able to get away with repudiation of successive holographic instruments in a valid pour-over will/trust through adoption or constructive adoption but that's beyond the scope of this discussion.

Otherwise, spot on. How are you not a mod in here, posa?

 

[Infinite Jest]

I suspect if JB had any such document, he would have been waving it with all his might.

I've also got to emphasise that Australian (presumably?) law is what counts here, and AFAIK my friends here have really only dealt with US law: I have no idea if there's a difference between the two in this situation.

 

[Cyc]

The path of least resistence here would be to appeal to his estate in form of a letter. This is assuming we know who those people are.

 

[GoddessLSD-XTC]

In my case, I'm thinking of writing his daughter a letter. She is a very nice person. Her dad, who was a really dear friend of mine, might have mentioned it to her.

BTW: I did donate some $$$ to BL and was happy to discover that BL servers also serve PillReports.