## Facts

- John F. Dodge, a Michigan domiciliary, executed a will creating a residuary testamentary trust primarily for the benefit of four of his six children.
- The trust paid income to the four named children during their respective lifetimes.
- The will provided that, upon the death of the four named children (i.e., when the trust terminated), the trust corpus would pass to the “heirs” of those children, “in such proportion as by law such heirs shall be entitled to receive same.”
- The will did not define “heirs,” did not specify whether “heirs” should be identified at Dodge’s death or at the children’s deaths, and did not state what jurisdiction’s “law” supplied the distribution proportions.
- After the death of the last surviving named child, competing claimants disputed who qualified as the children’s “heirs” and what shares each would take.
- The probate court construed the will to mean that each deceased child’s share of principal should be distributed to those persons who would inherit from that child under Michigan intestacy law, determined as of that child’s death.
- Multiple parties filed seven appeals challenging the probate court’s construction and resulting distribution plan.

## Issues

1. Does “heirs,” as used in the will’s remainder clause, refer to each child’s heirs as determined by intestate succession, rather than a narrower group such as “children” or “descendants”?
2. When are the “heirs” of each child identified for distribution purposes—at Dodge’s death, at trust termination, or at each child’s death?
3. What “law” governs the identification of heirs and their proportions—Michigan intestacy law, and if so, the law in effect at what time?

## Decision

- The Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed the probate court’s construction and distribution order in all material respects.
- The court held that “heirs” was used in its ordinary legal sense: the persons entitled to inherit from each named child under intestate succession.
- The court held that the heirs of each child are determined at that child’s death, because a living person has no heirs.
- The court applied Michigan intestacy law to identify the heirs and their proportional shares, using the statutes as they existed at the time of each child’s death.

## Legal Principles

- A court construing a will must carry out the testator’s intent as expressed in the instrument, reading the will as a whole.
- Unless the will shows a different meaning, “heirs” is presumed to be a term of art referring to those who take under the applicable intestacy statute.
- Because “heirs” are determined only at death, a gift to a person’s “heirs” generally makes the identity of takers contingent until that person dies.
- When a Michigan-domiciled testator directs distribution “as by law” without identifying another jurisdiction’s law, Michigan courts ordinarily look to Michigan intestacy law to supply the class of heirs and their shares.

## Conclusion

*Dodge Testamentary Trust* held that the will’s direction to distribute the trust corpus to the “heirs” of the four life-beneficiary children “in such proportion as by law” required determining each child’s heirs under Michigan intestacy statutes at the time of that child’s death, and distributing each child’s share accordingly; the Court of Appeals affirmed the probate court’s order implementing that construction.


Dodge Testamentary Trust, 330 N.W.2d 72 (1982)