Self-proven will vs. Kentucky statute

[jediclampet]

I understand that there is a Kentucky statute stating something to the effect of (paraphrasing) “if a father has 2 sons, his estate shall be divided equally between them”. But if the father died and had a self-proven (i.e., witnessed and notarized) will filed that explicitly stated that one son receive nothing and the other son receive everything, would the entire estate go to the specified son? Are there any circumstances in which the entire estate would not be inherited by the specified son? How can I investigate this? Thanks.

 

[anteater]

I understand that there is a Kentucky statute stating something to the effect of (paraphrasing) “if a father has 2 sons, his estate shall be divided equally between them”.

That would be the case if there is no valid will, the father has no surviving spouse, and the 2 sons are his only children (surviving or predeceased).

But if the father died and had a self-proven (i.e., witnessed and notarized) will filed that explicitly stated that one son receive nothing and the other son receive everything, would the entire estate go to the specified son? Are there any circumstances in which the entire estate would not be inherited by the specified son?

The disinherited son would have to challenge the will and convince the court to invalidate it. An explicit disinheritance is pretty tough to overcome. There might some technical flaw in the will's execution, but since the father went to the trouble of making it self-proving, that is probably a long shot. That leaves legal capacity to make a will and undue influence as the major grounds for a possible challenge.

How can I investigate this?

Not sure what you want to investigate.

 

[jediclampet]

Thanks for your reply!