What Can We Learn From an Irish Bachelor? Insights into Last Wills and Legal Disputes

Patrick McCarthy, a lifelong bachelor and descendant of an Irish family that first settled in Minnesota in 1850, passed away in April 2023 at the age of 87. McCarthy left behind around 134 acres of rolling farmland and forest worth over $10M and TWO (2) last wills! (one is good, two….not so much)

The first last will was drafted in 2020 in favor of Jodi McCarthy, a distant cousin of Patrick McCarthy. The second last will was drafted in 2022 in favor of Lee Markell, an independent contractor who monitored the County’s conservation easements. The two wills are essentially the same versions of one document, both requiring preservation of the land, with a few key differences as to the personal representatives.

Jodi alleges that the 2022 will is problematic in that Markell’s name was added on the will after McCarthy’s death. She also contends that the will wasn’t executed correctly in that It was signed by two bank employees, one of them a notary, while Patrick McCarthy was sitting outside in the car at the bank’s drive-up window, too sick to walk inside. Yikes!

As to Patrick McCarthy’s attorney, he had one. However, the attorney doesn’t recall ever drafting a last will for him. These documents appear to be self-made….

Key Takeaways:

• Understanding the Revocation Clause: The revocation clause, commonly found in last wills, serves to nullify previous wills and ensure the validity of the latest one. Its absence can lead to complications, as seen in McCarthy’s case.
• Implications of Missing Revocation Clause: Without a revocation clause, inconsistencies between previous and new wills can create legal ambiguities. McCarthy’s situation highlights the importance of proper legal drafting.
• Legal Ramifications: Jodi’s challenge to the 2022 will highlights potential legal battles arising from discrepancies in will execution. The court’s decision can hinge on various factors, including the presence of the revocation clause.

Conclusion:

McCarthy’s case underscores the significance of thorough legal counsel in drafting last wills to prevent disputes and ensure the proper execution of one’s final wishes.

So, what can we learn from a double last will?

We can discuss the first line of most last wills, the revocation clause. This clause states something flowery like, “I HEREBY RENOUNCE AND REVOKE all previous Wills and Testamentary dispositions of every nature and kind whatsoever made by me before.” Sometimes in old English, sometimes clearly spelled out, the gist is that this clause ensures that any previous will is revoked and the new last will governs and controls. The revocation clause is how we get rid of the old last will and replace it with a subsequent, new and updated last will.

If the revocation clause is missing (if someone drafts a last will themselves, for example,) the new last will replace only the inconsistencies between the two wills. So, if the revocation clause is not included in the new last will, the new last will only control the changes from the old will to the new will (Seems right).

Going back to good ol’ McCarthy; Here, in the Sunshine state, should Jodi get the 2022 last will thrown out for fraud or improper execution, she may be able to win her case. However, should the Court hold that the 2022 last will was valid, even if the revocation clause was not included in the last will, the new inconsistent clauses would govern, and Markell would win. And as per usual, we learn that having one attorney familiar with your wishes could avoid this entire mess!