Legal Opinion

In re the Estate of Haviland

Washington Supreme Court

Decided March 14, 2013No. 86412-8PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMadsen, C.J.

¶1 — During the pendency of a will contest involving Dr. James Haviland’s estate, the legislature amended the slayer statutes to disinherit those who financially abuse vulnerable adults. In light of the amendments, the administrator of the Haviland estate requested the trial court to determine whether Mary Haviland should be disinherited based on her conduct as found by the trial court. The trial court determined that the abuser statutes could not be applied to deny Ms. Haviland benefits from the Haviland estate because the statutes are triggered by financial abuse, which would require…

2Cases cited41 opinions

  1. Landgraf v. USI Film ProductsSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  2. Department of Ecology v. Campbell & Gwinn, L.L.C.Washington Supreme Court · 2002
  3. State, Dept. of Ecology v. Campbell & GwinnWashington Supreme Court · 2002
  4. State v. VargaWashington Supreme Court · 2004
  5. State v. VargaWashington Supreme Court · 2004

36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. In The Matter Of: Linda Cameron, App v. Atlantic Richfield Co., Aka, RespCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2019
  2. Eaden v. Estate of EvansCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2014
  3. Grant Dzaman, V. Diane GowmanCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2021
  4. Arends v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 2025
  5. Estate Of Calvin H. Evans, Sr., App. v. Sharon Eaden, Vicki Sansing, Res.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2014

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API