Estate of Glomset
1976 Okla. LEXIS 405, 1976 OK 30, 547 P.2d 951 (1976)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Under Oklahoma's pretermitted heir statute, the determination of whether a testator's omission of a child from a will was intentional must be made solely from the language within the four corners of the will. Extrinsic evidence is inadmissible to prove intent if the will is unambiguous on its face.
Facts:
- On October 16, 1972, John Larson Glomset, Sr. and his wife, Margie V. Glomset, executed joint and reciprocal wills.
- The wills stipulated that upon the death of one spouse, all property would go to the surviving spouse.
- The wills further provided that in the event of a common disaster, the entire estate would go to their son, John Larson Glomset, Jr.
- The wills made no mention of John Larson Glomset, Sr.'s 40-year-old daughter, Carolyn Gay Ghan.
- John Larson Glomset, Sr. died on October 15, 1973.
Procedural Posture:
- John Larson Glomset, Sr.'s will was filed for probate in the trial court.
- The will was admitted to probate, but the court reserved the question of whether Carolyn Gay Ghan was a pretermitted heir.
- Appellee, Carolyn Gay Ghan, filed a motion for a declaratory judgment asserting she was a pretermitted heir.
- The trial court sustained the motion, finding that Ghan was unintentionally omitted from the will and was entitled to an intestate share of the estate.
- Appellant, Margie V. Glomset, appealed the trial court's decision to the Oklahoma Court of Appeals.
- The Supreme Court of Oklahoma granted a writ of certiorari to review the case.
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 Oklahoma's pretermitted heir statute, 84 O.S. § 132, permit the use of extrinsic evidence to show that a testator's omission of a child from a will was intentional when the will itself contains no ambiguity?
Opinions:
Majority - Barnes, J.
No. When a will is unambiguous, extrinsic evidence is not permitted to show that a testator’s omission of a child was intentional. Oklahoma's pretermitted heir statute protects a child omitted from a will unless the intent to disinherit appears affirmatively from the four corners of the will itself. Here, the will is clear and unambiguous; it simply fails to mention the daughter, Carolyn Gay Ghan, and provides no indication as to why she was omitted. Following established precedent, such as In re Daniels’ Estate, the court must conclude the omission was unintentional without considering outside evidence. As no compelling reason was presented to overturn this long-standing interpretation, the daughter is deemed a pretermitted heir.
Dissenting - Hodges, V.C.J.
Yes. Extrinsic evidence should be admissible to determine the testator's true intent, as the majority's holding perpetuates a misinterpretation of the statute. The purpose of a "Massachusetts-type" pretermitted heir statute like Oklahoma's is to protect against unintentional oversights, not to contravene a testator's deliberate choice. The statute creates a rebuttable presumption that the omission was a mistake, and extrinsic evidence is the proper means to rebut it. Furthermore, the will could be considered ambiguous on its face because it creates the absurd result where the unmentioned daughter inherits while the specifically named son receives nothing. The trial court should have considered the offered extrinsic evidence of a strained relationship, which would have shown the omission was intentional.
Analysis:
This decision solidifies Oklahoma’s adherence to the strict "four corners" rule in pretermitted heir cases, placing it in a minority of jurisdictions. It establishes a bright-line rule that prioritizes the express text of a will over evidence of the testator's actual, subjective intent. This approach enhances testamentary certainty but risks producing outcomes that contradict the testator's true wishes if the intent to disinherit is not explicitly stated within the will. Consequently, estate planners in Oklahoma are on notice that disinheritance of a child must be clearly and affirmatively expressed in the testamentary instrument itself.
