## Facts

- Earle L. Berrell, domiciled in Alberta, Canada, lived with Erika Arndt and executed an Alberta holographic will.
- The will devised all of Berrell’s property, including Arkansas assets, to Arndt and did not mention Berrell’s two adult children, Bonita Berrell Carrigo and Edward James Berrell.
- Berrell owned real property in Arkansas (a residence in Little Rock), prompting an ancillary probate proceeding in Arkansas in addition to probate proceedings in Alberta.
- The children claimed they were pretermitted heirs under Arkansas law as to the Arkansas real property because the operative will neither mentioned nor provided for them.
- The Arkansas probate court applied Arkansas law, found the children pretermitted heirs, and awarded them the Arkansas real property; the personal representative and Arndt appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether Arkansas must apply Alberta law, rather than Arkansas law, to construe a foreign-executed will and determine succession to Arkansas real property.
2. Whether, under Arkansas law, children omitted from the operative will are pretermitted heirs entitled to inherit the Arkansas real property despite a devise of the entire estate to another beneficiary.

## Decision

- The Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed.
- A statute recognizing the validity of wills executed outside Arkansas did not require application of Alberta law to determine the effect of the will on Arkansas real property.
- Arkansas law, as the law of the situs, governed construction of the will and the devolution of Arkansas real estate.
- Applying Arkansas’s pretermitted-child statute, the children were pretermitted heirs as to the Arkansas real property because the will did not mention or provide for them and did not show an intent to omit them.

## Legal Principles

- The law of the situs controls descent, transfer, and testamentary disposition of real property located within the state.
- A statute validating foreign-executed wills generally addresses due execution and probate admissibility; it does not displace situs law governing construction and succession of in-state realty.
- Under Arkansas pretermitted-child law, a child omitted from the operative will is entitled to an intestate share unless the will itself indicates the omission was intentional.
- Extrinsic evidence such as language from a revoked prior will cannot substitute for an intentional-omission expression absent from the operative will’s text.

## Conclusion

Because Arkansas land is governed by Arkansas situs law, Arkansas applied its own rules for construing the will and protecting omitted children; the decedent’s children took the Arkansas real property as pretermitted heirs notwithstanding the foreign holographic will’s devise of all property to the decedent’s partner.


Craig v. Carrigo, 121 S.W.3d 154 (Ark. 2003)