In law school we learned that when someone witnesses another person execute a will, the witness has to be in the "conscious presence" of the signer. We read cases about whether being in another room counts if the witness can see the signer as he or she signs the will. Of course way back then no one could possibly imagine video conferencing.
Now that millions of people have Skype sessions routinely the question is bound to come up: if the witnesses are in a room thousands of miles from the signer of the will, but they are connected by video conference technology and can see and hear each other in real time, does that qualify as being in the conscious presence of each other so as to make the will signing legitimate? The Court of Appeals in Ohio recently had this question before it in Whitacre v. Crowe ( http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/9/2012/2012-ohio-2981.pdf). The court concluded that under the Ohio definition of "conscious presence" video conferencing while signing a will was not permitted and invalidated the will.
The result was that the will, which had excluded three of the decedent's five children and named one of the remaining two as executor and the other as sole beneficiary, was revoked from probate, meaning the decedent died without a will. In that case, the general laws of intestacy would go into effect. Presumably the result would be that the five children will share equally in the estate, which is probably the reason for the lawsuit in the first place.
No comments:
Post a Comment