No, the judge said the will was invalid because it did not have two witnesses and it was typed and signed by the notary but did not have two witnesses! It would have been valid if it were handwritten by my mother-in-law and had no witnesses according to The Codes Of Law!
That's right it would have been legal had the notary not typed it. Had your M-I-L handwritten the will the notary wouldn't have illegally been creating a will.
Is the op in Louisiana or Puerto Rico? If not, your post is irrelevent
Absolutely not. If someone wants an in-law, a best friend, their parrot or cat to inherit, they simply need to execute a valid will. No way that should be dictated by law. You are being ridiculous.
Thank you for your candor! I am just hurting because I feel robbed of my inheritance due to the notary's error!
It wasn't the notary's error. It was your M-I-L's decision to use a non-lawyer to write her will and the notary's illegal action in writing it.
I've been married to my wife for over 20 years and am very close to my in-laws. I would never expect to be considered an heir to my in-laws as a function of law.
Your circumstances are not like mine! My mother-in-law and husband wanted me to have the land! I was not Expecting to be considered! I was considered! It was written in an invalid will! I realize I should not have brought my situation online! I have asked to be removed from this forum!
You asked if I feel that the law should be changed to include in-laws as those who are "heirs". I replied with my experience and stated that, no, I don't believe the law should be changed. If you ask the question, don't snap at those who answer. Yeesh!
I did not snap, I replied by expressing what I felt. You are entitled to your feelings, and I am entitled to mine! We are two different people! I still believe the law should be changed! Your opinion did not change that view!
Your excessive use of exclamation points makes every statement an...well...exclamation.
See?
