## Facts

- Tai-Kin Wong, a 44-year-old businessman, died suddenly on December 31, 1992.
- Wong lived with Xi Zhao, his girlfriend and business partner, with whom he shared personal and business ties.
- After Wong’s death, a sealed, sticker-decorated envelope was found in his office containing a brief handwritten note, dated and initialed.
- The note read, in substance: “All Tai-Kin Wong’s [arrow] Xi Zhao, my best half TKW 12-31-92.”
- The note contained no verb, no description of any property, and no express reference to death, inheritance, or a gift.
- Zhao petitioned to admit the note to probate as a holographic will; Wong’s father (later substituted by siblings) contested, arguing the note lacked testamentary intent.
- The trial court admitted the note to probate as a valid holographic will passing the entire estate to Zhao.

## Issues

1. Whether the handwritten note, as a matter of law, showed testamentary intent and contained sufficient operative dispositive language to qualify as a holographic will under California law.
2. Whether extrinsic evidence and surrounding circumstances could supply testamentary intent or missing dispositive words where the writing itself lacked them.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal reversed the order admitting the note to probate.
- The court held the writing could not constitute a valid holographic will as a matter of law because it lacked operative testamentary language and did not effect a transfer of property at death.
- The court concluded that the estate would be administered as intestate rather than under the contested writing.

## Legal Principles

- A holographic will must be handwritten and signed (and dated under the applicable statute), and it must reflect testamentary intent shown by words indicating a disposition of property at death.
- A writing that contains no operative words of gift or disposition fails as a will even if it is handwritten, dated, and signed/initialed.
- Extrinsic evidence may clarify ambiguous testamentary language, but it cannot supply wholly missing dispositive words or convert a relational or identificatory statement into a testamentary act.
- Nonverbal symbols (such as an arrow) lack fixed legal meaning and cannot substitute for written dispositive language required to make a will.

## Conclusion

The court held that a minimal handwritten note consisting essentially of names, an arrow, and an affectionate phrase did not express a donative transfer at death; because testamentary intent must be grounded in the writing’s operative language, the document was not a holographic will and could not be admitted to probate.


Estate of Wong, 40 Cal. App. 4th 1198 (Ct. App. 1995)