## Facts

- A testator died leaving a will that created a testamentary trust paying income to his surviving spouse for life.
- The will directed that, upon the spouse’s death, the trustee distribute the remaining trust estate to the testator’s sister “if she then survives, and if not then to her heirs at law.”
- The sister survived the testator but died before the life tenant; the life tenant later died, terminating the trust.
- The trustee petitioned for instructions whether the sister’s “heirs at law” should be identified at the sister’s death or at the life tenant’s death.
- If heirs were determined at the sister’s death, her husband was among the heirs; he later died leaving the residue of his estate to a charitable beneficiary.
- If heirs were determined at the life tenant’s death, only the sister’s niece and nephew would qualify because the husband had predeceased the life tenant.
- The probate court determined heirs as of the life tenant’s death and ordered distribution to the niece and nephew.
- The charitable beneficiary appealed, arguing the heirs were fixed at the sister’s death.

## Issues

1. When a will provides that trust remainder is payable to a named person “if she then survives, and if not then to her heirs at law,” are the “heirs at law” determined at the named person’s death or at termination of the preceding life estate?

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal reversed.
- The court held that, absent evidence of a contrary intent in the will, the class of “heirs at law” is determined at the death of the named person whose heirs are referenced, even if that person dies before the life tenant.
- Because the sister’s heirs were fixed at her death, the husband’s share passed through his estate to his residuary beneficiary.

## Legal Principles

- A testator’s intent, as expressed in the instrument, controls; rules of construction apply when the instrument does not clearly resolve the disputed point.
- A gift to “the heirs” of a named person is presumed to refer to those who would take under intestacy law as of that person’s death, unless the instrument shows a different intent.
- Courts apply a preference for early vesting when the instrument does not indicate that vesting or class membership is postponed.
- Phrases fixing the time of distribution (e.g., “upon termination,” “pay, deliver and convey,” and survivorship conditions) do not, without more, establish that “heirs” are to be identified at the later distribution date.
- General policy favoring distribution to a testator’s blood relatives does not override the default rule for determining “heirs” without textual support.

## Conclusion

The court construed the remainder clause to fix the sister’s “heirs at law” at the sister’s death, not at the later termination of the life estate, and reversed the probate order that had identified heirs as of the life tenant’s death.


Estate of Woodworth, 18 Cal. App. 4th 936 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th Dist. 1993)