Legal Opinion · Dissent

Estate of Reap v. Malloy

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided April 1, 1999No. 97-PR-461Published

1DissentWagner, Chief Judge

In my view, the undisputed facts of this case support the trial court’s conclusion that the doctrine of implied revocation applies to revoke the decedent’s will. See D.C.Code § 18-109. The rule has developed in this jurisdiction that a divorce and property settlement or a divorce and adjudication of the parties’ property rights in the divorce action *332impliedly revokes a will executed during the marriage in favor of the testator’s former spouse. Estate of Liles, 435 A.2d 379, 381-82 (D.C.1981); Luff v. Luff, 123 U.S.App. D.C. 251, 253, 359 F.2d 235, 237 (1966). Under either theory, the will was…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Coleman v. JacksonCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1960
  2. Major v. Inner City Property Management, Inc.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1995
  3. Travis v. BensonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1976
  4. Deming v. TurnerDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1945
  5. Jackson v. JacksonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1964

9 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