## Facts

- Epps E. Sinclair died intestate while domiciled in Vermont and owned real property located in New Hampshire.
- The widow, Edith M. Sinclair, served as administratrix of the Vermont domiciliary estate.
- The decedent’s brother, Quincy V. Sinclair, served as administrator of the New Hampshire ancillary estate.
- New Hampshire and Vermont law differed on the surviving spouse’s intestate share in real property; application of New Hampshire law would yield the widow a larger share.
- In the New Hampshire probate proceeding, the widow waived dower and homestead and claimed the statutory distributive share of the New Hampshire real estate under New Hampshire law.
- The New Hampshire probate court awarded the widow her claimed share under New Hampshire law, and the ancillary administrator appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether the surviving spouse’s intestate interest in real property located in New Hampshire is governed by New Hampshire law (situs) or by Vermont law (the decedent’s domicile).
2. Whether the fact that New Hampshire law would provide the widow a larger recovery affects the choice-of-law determination.

## Decision

- The court affirmed the probate court’s award.
- New Hampshire law, as the law of the situs, governed the widow’s interest in the New Hampshire real estate, regardless of the decedent’s Vermont domicile.
- The widow’s ability to obtain a larger share under New Hampshire law was immaterial to the governing choice-of-law rule.

## Legal Principles

- The descent and distribution of real property are governed by the law of the state where the land is located; the intestate decedent’s domicile does not control succession to out-of-state land.
- The existence and extent of a surviving spouse’s statutory or common-law interest in a deceased spouse’s land are determined by the law of the land’s situs.
- Choice of law is not altered because one state’s law is more favorable to the surviving spouse than another’s.
- In computing the surviving spouse’s interest in real property located in the situs state, courts generally do not include the value of the decedent’s real property located in other states.

## Conclusion

The court held that New Hampshire, as the situs of the decedent’s land, exclusively governed the widow’s intestate share in that New Hampshire real estate, making the decedent’s Vermont domicile and the comparative generosity of Vermont law irrelevant to the determination.


Sinclair v. Sinclair, 99 N.H. 316, 109 A.2d 851 (N.H. 1954)