Two exactly similar mississippi cases with two exactly different outcomes

[dburcham]

Mississippi

CASE 1.

My aunt (one of eight sibblings) died intestate. Spouse, offspring, parents, grandparents deceased. There were two remaining living sibblings. The estated was divided up into seven equal parts with each sibbling (living or deceased) receiving 1/7 of the estate. My father's (a deceased sibbling) 1/7 was divided between his two decendants, my brother and I, each receiving 1/14 of the estate.

CASE 2.

My mother's cousin died intestate. He had no decendants, spouse, parents, and grandparents deceased. He had six uncles. Three living half uncles, three deceased full uncles. One uncle contacted lawyer "A" who informed him that the neices and nephew's of the full uncles were responsible for buial, expenses, ect. Afterwards, same lawyer, after finding out the old gent had quite an estate in land and timber said he had made a mistake, and that estate was to go entirely to living half uncles, no portion to go to deceased uncles decendants.

My mother and I went to lawyer "B" who agreed with lawyer "A", but would not put it in writing or take compensation.

Mother and other heirs apperant, went to lawyer "C" three times, and were finally told that lawyers "A and B" were correct but would not so state in writing and did not ask for nor would accept compensation.

On direction of lawyer "A", the appraiser of the estate; whom lawyer "A" had hired, bought, cut, and sold the timber. The money and land was then divided up among the living uncles and lawyer "A".

Why the difference in the dispersion of the two estates. I have read the Mississippi code regarding decent of land (see below), but I am not a lawyer.

If the lawyer in case 1 was wrong, what should be done to correct the mistake.
If the lawyer(s) in case 2 were wrong, what can be done about it. Case 2 was about 15 years ago.

Thanks in advance for your advise and/or comments.

Sincerely
Dave from Inthewoods, Mississippi

MISSISSIPPI CODE

§ 91-1-3. Descent of land.

When any person shall die seized of any estate of inheritance in lands, tenements, and hereditaments not devised, the same shall descend to his or her children, and their descendants, in equal parts, the descendants of the deceased child or grandchild to take the share of the deceased parent in equal parts among them. When there shall not be a child or children of the intestate nor descendants of such children, then to the brothers and sisters and father and mother of the intestate and the descendants of such brothers and sisters in equal parts, the descendants of a sister or brother of the intestate to have in equal parts among them their deceased parent's share. If there shall not be a child or children of the intestate, or descendants of such children, or brothers or sisters, or descendants of them, or father or mother, then such estate shall descend, in equal parts, to the grandparents and uncles and aunts, if any there be; otherwise, such estate shall descend in equal parts to the next of kin of the intestate in equal degree, computing by the rules of the civil law. There shall not be any representation among collaterals, except among the descendants of the brothers and sisters of the intestate.

Sources: Codes, Hutchinson's 1848, ch. 44, art. 2 (50); 1857, ch. 60, art. 110; 1871, § 1948; 1880, § 1271; 1892, § 1543; 1906, § 1649; Hemingway's 1917, § 1381; 1930, § 1402; 1942, § 468; Laws, 1952, ch. 252, § 1.What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

 

[Dandy Don]

What year was probate opened and/or finished in Case 1?

The cases are NOT comparable, because there is a different set of surviving relatives. There is an order of succession list for intestate proceedings, and the more closely related surviving family members are higher up on the list.

The descent of land law does NOT apply here because THERE IS NO DESCENT OF LAND. The land was sold and therefore title is not being transferred to anyone else.

The fact that the attorneys would not state their opinions in writing is allowable but should have been challenged more--they should at least be able to show their client or CITE THE SPECIFIC LAW that applies to the situation that is being described.

Except for a very serious legal error, there is not anything you can do after probate has closed, especially for case 2.

DANDY DON IN OKLAHOMA ([email protected])

 

[dburcham]

Thank You Sir for your answer. Probate in case 1 was completed in September of 2007. My thinking was that, since in case 2, my grandfather's children (my mother and uncle) were not included in the dispersion of that estate, that my brother and I should not have been included in the probate of case #1, that all assets should have gone to the two surviving sibblings. Providing that the second case was done correctly. The reason I used the decent of land section was simple ignorance. It seemed to fit the way any estate should be distributed in the absence of a will. But alas, my legal training consists only of watching "Perry Mason", and trying to talk my way out of a couple of traffic tickets (I am 0 for 3). Case two has been a PITA, because it has really ripped that side of the family up. Family events (weddings, funerals, etc.) are really a strain on everyone.

Thanks Again
Dave

 

[anteater]

Upon reading through the statute, it appears that the descendants of only predeceased children or siblings, if there are no living or predeceased children, share in the intestate estate. Once you get to the level of aunts and uncles, only those that survive share in the intestate estate.

The "Descent of land" section also applies to personal property.

91-1-11. Personal estate to descend as real estate.
When any person shall die possessed of goods and chattels or personal estate not bequeathed, the same shall descend to and be distributed among his or her heirs in the same manner that real estate not devised descends.

 

[dburcham]

Mr. or Ms. Anteater, thank you for your reply. Before I make any further comments, I need to go off in a corner and look at my cards and count my money, and try to remember if four of a kind beats a straight before I see your raise and call or raise again, or just fold. I looked up inheritance in the "World Book" encyclopedia, ( which I consider to be "The Authority" on everything. It gave a brief description and in parentheses said (see attorney). I looked up "attorney" and it gave no description, but in parentheses said (SEE YELLOW PAGES)!!!!!!!

Thanks for Your Time and Interest
Dave from Upastump, Mississippi