INTERPRETATION

Interpretation of the terms of a will is a process which does not lend itself to facile explanation.
For each trend or technique, there seems to be an opposing trend or technique. In some cases
rigid rules of future interests dictate what the testator is deemed to have intended by a certain
word. In other cases, typically when an “ambiguity” is found, words take on entirely new
meanings.

Recall that the application of wills doctrines may give an unexpected meaning to words: Anti-
lapse and ademption doctrines may cause a bequest of “My 100 shares of IBM stock to my
brothers” to be interpreted “200 shares of Xerox to my nieces.”

The Holy Grail of the interpretation process is the “intention of the testator.” In search of that
intention, various techniques have been used. Most words have varying degrees of clarity.
Some words, especially “technical” words such as “heir” have precise meanings which will be
attributed to the testator unless it is obvious that he did not intend them. (For example, a will
which starts “This is my will if I die intestate. . . .”) The more usual legal approach to a word is
Justice Holmes’ much quoted assertion, “A word is not a crystal, transparent and unchanged, it
is the skin of a living thought and may vary greatly in color and content according to the
circumstances and time in which it is used.” Beyond this approach is the circular and less
helpful semantic approach by which the word is deemed to mean whatever the user intended it
to mean.

A sampler of interpretation principles includes the following:

• All the testamentary writings should be construed together to be consistent, if possible. If

they are inconsistent, the later will prevail.

• The will should be construed to avoid partial or complete intestacy, but the courts will not
write the will for the testator.

• Words are to be taken in their ordinary sense and technical words are given their technical
meaning, except that any contrary intention by the testator can be shown and given effect.
As an examination technique in this area, the presence of quotation marks or other indicia of
direct quotation offers the material about which interpretation may be sought. Three typical
areas for interpretation are as follows:

1. What passes under a bequest of “belongings,” “bonds,” “business,” “cash,” “contents,”

“dwelling,” “funds,” “household,” “money,” “personal” property, estate, effects or things,
“possessions,” or “securities”?

2. Who takes under certain descriptions such as “child,” “first cousin,” “devisee,” “family,”
“spouse,” “off-springs” or “relations”?

3. What is the effect of certain provisions? For example, a gift to a class which includes a person
specifically excluded in another provision of the will, percentages which do not total 100,
whether a fee simple or a life estate is given to a beneficiary, implied bequests, gifts over in
default, bequests for “college education” or “maintenance” and gifts to the executor who does
not so serve.