Estate of McKown v. Rapue
274 S.W.3d 496, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 1568 (2008)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Under Kansas law, which must be given full faith and credit, a decree of separate maintenance does not terminate a spouse's inheritance rights unless the decree specifically and clearly states the intent to terminate such rights. General language dividing property or waiving claims is insufficient to extinguish a surviving spouse's statutory inheritance rights.
Facts:
- Elaine McKown and Larry McKown were married in 1968.
- In 1995, a Kansas District Court entered a decree of separate maintenance for the couple, finding them incompatible.
- The decree divided their marital property, awarding Elaine McKown the marital home and Larry McKown a lake lot and his retirement benefits, stating the retirement benefits were his "sole and separate property free and clear of any right, title, interest or claim" from Elaine.
- The decree also noted that each party would keep the personal property in their possession and neither would make any further claim upon the other for any personal property.
- After the decree was entered, the couple lived separately but never divorced.
- In 2002, Larry McKown executed a will acknowledging Elaine McKown as his spouse but leaving his entire estate to his mother and, contingently, to his sister, Lutricia Rapue.
- Larry McKown died on May 7, 2007, leaving an estate that included real estate, a car, household goods, and life insurance proceeds.
Procedural Posture:
- Larry McKown's last will and testament was admitted to probate in the Missouri circuit court.
- Elaine McKown filed an election of surviving spouse, an application for exempt property, and an application for homestead allowance with the circuit court.
- The circuit court held a hearing and subsequently entered a judgment denying all of Elaine McKown's claims.
- The circuit court found that all of the surviving spouse's claims, including inheritance rights, had been previously settled by the Kansas decree of separate maintenance.
- Elaine McKown, as the appellant, appealed the circuit court's judgment to the Missouri Court of Appeals.
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 Kansas decree of separate maintenance that divides marital property but does not explicitly terminate inheritance rights bar a surviving spouse from making statutory claims for an elective share, exempt property, and homestead allowance against the deceased spouse's estate?
Opinions:
Majority - Welsh, J.
No, a Kansas decree of separate maintenance does not bar a surviving spouse's statutory claims unless it explicitly terminates inheritance rights. The court must give the Kansas decree the same effect it would have in Kansas. Under Kansas precedent, specifically Linson v. Johnson, a separate maintenance decree permits the marital relation to continue in a legal sense, and a surviving spouse retains the right to inherit unless the decree "specifically and clearly indicate[s] an intent ... to terminate the rights of inheritance." The language in the McKowns' decree, which set aside property "free and clear of any ... claim," did not meet this high standard of specificity required to cut off inheritance rights. Furthermore, Kansas law holds that a separate maintenance decree cannot dispose of property acquired after the decree is entered. Therefore, Elaine McKown's rights as a surviving spouse were not barred by the decree, and she is entitled to pursue her statutory claims against her deceased husband's entire estate.
Analysis:
This decision reinforces the principle that waivers of fundamental statutory rights, such as spousal inheritance, must be explicit and unambiguous. By applying Kansas law under the full faith and credit clause, the court demonstrates that the interpretation of a foreign judgment is controlled by the law of the state that issued it. The case serves as a crucial reminder for legal practitioners that boilerplate language in settlement agreements dividing property is insufficient to sever all legal ties between separated spouses. To effectively terminate inheritance rights in a separate maintenance action, the decree must contain express language to that effect, a precedent that will guide future drafting and litigation concerning spousal rights after separation but before divorce.
