A Suprise Beneficiary
In the 1950s, Father and Mother created four trusts—one for each of their four young sons. Those trusts included termination when each beneficiary son reached age 30, presumably with the expectation that he would then be financially mature and able to handle the money.
One of the sons, Charles, married and had a child in 1972. His daughter was named Zazulak. In 1975 Charles commenced divorce proceedings, and in 1976 he executed his will. Charles provided nothing to his infant daughter, instead directing that his estate be divided among his brothers’ trusts. In the event that a brother died before Charles, that brother’s share would go to their mother—and if she had also died, the money would be divided among the trusts of the surviving brothers.
There matters stood until 2020, when Charles died. Apparently, he never took another look at his will. After a brother was named executor of the estate and offered the will for probate, Zazulak objected, arguing that she was the sole heir of Charles’ estate. The bequest to the trusts for the brothers failed, she argued, because by their terms those trusts had all terminated years earlier, when the brothers reached age 30. The mother had died as well, so she was also not a factor.
Zazulak won her case, and became Charles’ sole heir. Question: Charles must have known that the trusts would terminate at age 30, because his own trust should have terminated in 1980. Why did he never revisit his estate planning documents? He took that secret to the grave [Estate of Long, (Tex. App. Apr. 29, 2025)].
How long has it been since you reviewed your will? Have there been any significant changes in your life since then? Do you still own all the assets mentioned in your will? Does a change in your wealth level suggest that new provisions should be considered for your estate plan? Please call upon us with your wealth management questions.
(January 2026)
© 2026 M.A. Co. All rights reserved.