Article by Ronald J. Scalise, Jr.
This Article, part of the ACTEC Symposium on Conflict of Laws in Trusts and Estates, proceeds in four parts. Part II provides a detailed examination of the alternative rules of validation on testamentary formalities or matters for will execution provided primarily, but not exclusively, in the Uniform Probate Code, the major statutory model for most the states in the United States. Also considered, however, are approaches of other statutory schemes and conventions, including the Hague Convention on Will Formalities, the English Wills Act, and the European Union Succession Regulation. Part III addresses and examines, in similar fashion, the treatment of matters of a testator's capacity and free consent under conflict-of-laws provisions in the United States and abroad. Although equally important as the formal validity of a will, matters of capacity and consent are much less developed in the conflict-of-laws analysis than the issue of testamentary formalities. Nonetheless, matters of capacity and free consent are becoming increasingly important in the modern day. Part IV considers matters of conflict of laws regarding formal and intrinsic validity for the creation of trusts. Because this issue is not fundamentally different, in most instances, from the same matters regarding wills, this section heavily relies upon Parts II and III. Finally, Part V offers a brief conclusion, calls for a rethinking of the conflict-of-laws rules generally governing matters of validity for wills and trusts, and offers some general principles and thoughts for doing so.
About the Author
Ronald J. Scalise, Jr., John Minor Wisdom Professor of Civil Law, Tulane Law School, Tulane University. The author wishes to express his thanks and appreciation to the participants of the 2022 Tulane/ACTEC Academic Symposium on Conflict of Laws in Trusts and Estates and to his research assistant, Emily Shinn.
Citation
97 Tul. L. Rev. 887