Cathy Cyfers v. Jack Cyfers
759 S.E.2d 475, 2014 WL 2560718, 233 W. Va. 528 (2014)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
For an extrinsic document to be incorporated by reference into a will, it must be in existence at the time the will is executed, the will must manifest the testator's intent to incorporate it, and the will must identify the document with sufficient certainty.
Facts:
- Lois Jayne Cyfers Miller (the Decedent) retained an attorney to prepare her Last Will and Testament.
- On August 15, 2006, the Decedent executed the Will, which referenced an "Exhibit A" that was described as being of the same date.
- Exhibit A was a five-page, unsigned, and unwitnessed document containing handwritten bequests of personal and real property to various relatives.
- After executing the Will, the Decedent made additional handwritten notations on Exhibit A.
- One of the handwritten notations on Exhibit A included a date of November 29, 2006, nearly four months after the Will's execution.
- The Decedent's attorney could not state what specific language or bequests were contained within Exhibit A on the date the Will was executed.
- The Decedent died on January 7, 2009, and her Will was submitted for probate with the handwritten Exhibit A attached.
Procedural Posture:
- The Cabell County Commission admitted the Decedent's Will and the attached Exhibit A to probate.
- Certain beneficiaries (Respondents) petitioned the County Commission to remove the co-executors for failing to administer the estate according to Exhibit A.
- The co-executors filed a petition for declaratory relief in the Circuit Court of Cabell County, seeking a determination on the validity of Exhibit A.
- The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment in the circuit court action.
- The circuit court first indicated it would grant summary judgment against incorporating Exhibit A, but after a motion for reconsideration, it reversed its position.
- On November 28, 2012, the circuit court entered a final order granting summary judgment in favor of the Respondent beneficiaries, ruling that Exhibit A was properly incorporated by reference into the Will.
- The Petitioners, Cathy Cyfers, Joseph Cyfers, and Megan Cyfers, appealed the circuit court's summary judgment order to the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a handwritten exhibit attached to a will get incorporated by reference when there is insufficient evidence to prove the exhibit's specific contents at the time the will was executed, and undisputed evidence shows that at least one part of the exhibit was added afterward?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Workman
No. A handwritten exhibit attached to a will does not get incorporated by reference where there is insufficient evidence to prove the exhibit's specific contents existed at the time of the will's execution. The doctrine of incorporation by reference requires that the extrinsic document must be in existence at the time the will is executed. Here, there was no evidence of what bequests were contained in Exhibit A at the time of execution, and undisputed proof showed at least one bequest was added afterward. Because it is impossible to prove that the Exhibit A submitted for probate was the same document that existed when the will was signed, the entire exhibit fails incorporation. The court cannot sever the post-execution additions from the original text without proof of what that original text was. This strict rule is necessary to protect the sanctity and integrity of the testamentary process from potential fraud or later alteration.
Analysis:
This case formally adopts and clarifies the three-part test for the doctrine of incorporation by reference in West Virginia, emphasizing the strict requirement that the extrinsic document must be in existence at the time of the will's execution. The ruling establishes that if a proponent cannot meet the burden of proving the exact contents of the document at the time the will was signed, the entire document will be deemed invalidly incorporated. This decision serves as a significant cautionary precedent for estate planning attorneys, highlighting the perils of using separate, amendable memoranda for bequests without creating clear, contemporaneous evidence of the document's contents at the moment of the will's execution. It effectively prevents courts from attempting to salvage a testator's potential intent by guessing which parts of a document are valid.
