Litigation

Lessons from Litigation: Can You Make Joint Wills?

by Jonathan A. Nelson

Occasionally, I get a question about whether a husband and wife creating a joint estate plan should have one will or two.

A joint will has been legally possible in Virginia since the 19th Century. Although I am not aware of any joint wills other than between spouses appearing in our case law, the case law also does not require marriage or any other similar relationship between the parties.  As a practical matter, the original of the will is admitted to probate on the death of the first as to the property of the first, and then it is re-admitted by reference on the death of the second as to the property of the second.

For a number of practical reasons, however, joint wills are generally inadvisable.  The execution of the document is easier to make a mistake on, whether in having the correct number of witnesses (neither testator counts as a witness) or in the self-proving affidavit correctly setting out what was done.  If the surviving testator changes the county or state of his residence, it will make obtaining and probating the document difficult and may require litigation to establish the will, since the original is already held by another court.  Furthermore, it requires the surviving testator’s executor to know both that the will has already been probated and that it is still the last will of the testator; an error as to either can require costly litigation to correct.

The joint will also requires great care in following its terms, particularly as to property conveyed from the first testator to the second, as that property would no longer be subject to a gift made only by the first testator even if there was a contingent beneficiary for that property; again, ambiguities or questions of interpretation are fertile grounds for otherwise avoidable litigation.

The case of Williams v. Williams, 123 Va. 643 (1918), involved more than a century ago what is perhaps the strongest reason to avoid a joint will:

The joint will itself is still revocable by the surviving testator as to his own property.  Accordingly, it does not provide any protection to the first-to-die that the survivor will retain those terms.  However, the fact that it is a joint will is always going to raise the question of whether the joint will was also a mutual contract to establish a will, which can be enforceable. 

Rather than creating this question (which may only be resolvable by litigation), it is almost certainly preferable to set out the contract to establish a will as its own unambiguous document (or incorporated in the document that includes the consideration for the contract, such as in a premarital agreement), and execute separate wills which can more readily be judged to satisfy the contract or not.

A joint estate plan that provides both certainty and flexibility, while avoiding preventable legal conflicts, requires an experienced estate planning attorney who can carefully balance the individual circumstances of the family, understand the goals, and put in place the instruments that accomplish them.

  

Virginia attorney Jonathan A. Nelson practices in estate planning, probate, trust administration, business formation, and estate and trust litigation, and brings nearly 20 years of experience resolving conflicts, negotiating settlements, vigorously advocating in the courtroom, and navigating compliance matters. He uses a personal touch and extensive legal knowledge to ensure that the particular needs and interests of each client are reflected in the legal services they receive.

The attorneys of Smith Pugh & Nelson, PLC, offer the experienced counsel, personal attention, and customized legal services needed to address the many complex issues surrounding estate planning, probate, and trust administration. Contact us at (703) 777-6084 to schedule a consultation.

Lessons from Litigation: The Litigious Family Member

by Jonathan A. Nelson

Four years ago, the Virginia Supreme Court described the course of the Galiotos family estate and trust matters as the “brothers’ prolonged disputes.”  Since that time, those brothers have gone through seven more appeals, two dealing with the distribution division and five dealing more or less with the various court orders attempting to sort out the parties’ litigiousness, the last having been ruled on this past week (October 21, 2025).

The point of this post is not to sort out the finer points of the Galiotos dispute, but to point out that when creating or updating your estate plan, it is wise to anticipate potential problems and take steps to reduce the opportunities for your family to be torn apart by the very decisions meant to benefit and bring them together.

       1.       Avoiding Grounds for Ill Will 

Every family situation is different – there are no one-size-fits-all solutions in estate planning.  Terms that are practical for an only child may cause problems among three siblings with varying expectations, and wholly wrong for an estate plan where extended family will try to exert control.

That said, sometimes the provisions themselves raise problems. In my experience, otherwise reasonable beneficiaries are more likely to involve attorneys and courts when the terms favor secrecy, insulate the trustee from accountability, give ambiguous or voluminous instructions making it difficult to assess whether the trustee has been faithful, excessively withhold input and control from beneficiaries, and provide insufficient flexibility for unanticipated situations and events.

The choice of a trustee is also very important. A trustee with an overbearing personality may harm relationships with beneficiaries; an indecisive individual can hamper the effectiveness and timeliness of your trust’s administration.  If that person is still your choice, you may need specific terms to ameliorate those tendencies.

       2.       The Known Litigious Person  

Sometimes people you care about are already contentious or litigious.  My experience is that avoiding this issue does no one any favors.  There are estate planning tools you can consider, from carefully crafted no-contest clauses to distributions conditioned on waivers to using third party fiduciaries.

For the documents themselves, it is particularly important that an estate plan not create easy opportunities for litigation.  This means there is often a premium on the documents being shorter to avoid terms open to interpretation. It may also mean forgoing complex provisions and lengthy administration in favor of dividing the pie and allowing each to go his or her own way.

It is also important, regardless of the other mechanisms used, for your estate planning attorney to create robust contemporaneous documentation showing your documents set out your wishes.

       3.       Recognize That Sometimes Court is the Only Option

The basis of the observation from Federalist Paper 51 that “if men were angels, no government would be necessary” is no less true in estate planning.  Regardless of the care in assembling an estate plan, any of the people involved could step over a line.  In that case, outside resolution (often through a court) may be the only means of correcting it. 

An estate plan is a balance of probabilities, but is best served when it includes accountability, appropriate tools for administering efficiency while encouraging faithfulness to you and your beneficiaries, and the means of dealing with the unexpected – even in the face of a beneficiary’s, fiduciary’s, or outsider’s greed, intractability, self-importance, or obstreperousness. 

Going back to the Galiotos family, one piece of the dispute involved a trustee brother refusing to turn over financial information about a business he had been running but which the court found the other brothers were to become partners in. The court ended up being the necessary remedy. It seems to me that an estate plan designed to shield that fiduciary from having to make such disclosures or from the court compelling the same would not be the right answer.

Addressing difficult topics in advance – especially with an attorney experienced in both estate planning and estate litigation – may be the best way to ensure your intentions are not subjected to “prolonged disputes.”

  

Virginia attorney Jonathan A. Nelson practices in estate planning, probate, trust administration, business formation, and estate and trust litigation, and brings nearly 20 years of experience resolving conflicts, negotiating settlements, vigorously advocating in the courtroom, and navigating compliance matters. He uses a personal touch and extensive legal knowledge to ensure that the particular needs and interests of each client are reflected in the legal services they receive.

The attorneys of Smith Pugh & Nelson, PLC, offer the experienced counsel, personal attention, and customized legal services needed to address the many complex issues surrounding estate planning, probate, and trust administration. Contact us at (703) 777-6084 to schedule a consultation.