Abatement of debts and legacies

Abatement of debts and legacies is a common law doctrine of wills that holds that when the equitable assets of a deceased person are not sufficient to satisfy fully all the creditors, their debts must abate proportionately, and they must accept a dividend.[1]

Wills, trusts
and estates
Part of the common law series
Wills

Sections

Contest

Property disposition

  • Satisfaction of legacies
  • Wills and conflict of laws
Trusts

Common types

Other types

  • Life interest
  • Reversionary interest

Governing doctrines
Estate administration
Related topics
Other common law areas

In the case of legacies when the funds or assets out of which they are payable are not sufficient to pay them in full, the legacies abate in proportion, unless there is a priority given specially to any particular legacy. Annuities are also subject to the same rule as general legacies.

The order of abatement is usually:

  1. Intestate property
  2. The residuary of the estate
  3. General Devises—i.e., cash gifts
  4. Demonstrative Devises—i.e., cash gifts from a specific account, stocks, bonds, securities, etc.
  5. Specific Devises—i.e., specified items of personal property, real property, etc.

Non-probate property—i.e., life insurance policies—do not abate.

Definitions

A specific devise, is a specific gift in a will to a specific person other than an amount of money. For example, if James's will states that he is leaving his $500,000 yacht to his brother Mike, the yacht would be a specific devise.

A general devise, is a monetary gift to a specific person to be satisfied out of the overall estate. For example, if James's will states that he is leaving $500,000 to his son Sam then the money would be a general devise.

A demonstrative devise, is money given from a particular account. For example, "$10,000 to be paid from the sale of my GM stock."

A residual devise is one left to a devisee after all specific and general devices have been made. For example, James's will might say: "I give all the rest, residue and remainder of my estate to my daughter Lilly." Lilly would be the residual devisee and entitled to James's residuary estate.

gollark: Why did states happen in the *first* place if they aren't good and there's a stable alternative?
gollark: > Collectivization will take place naturally as soon as state coercion is over, the workers themselveswill own their workplaces as the capitalists will no longer have any control over them. This iswhat happened during the Spanish Revolution of 1936, during which workers and farmers seized andmanaged the means of production collectively. For those capitalists who had a good attitude towardsworkers before the revolution, there was also a place - they joined the horizontal labor collectivesUm. This seems optimistic.
gollark: > "Legally anyone can start their own business. Just launch a company!”. These words oftenmentioned by the fans of capitalism are very easy to counter, because they have a huge flaw. Namely,if everyone started a company, who would work for all these companiesThis is a bizarre objection. At the somewhat extreme end, stuff *could* probably still work fine if the majority of people were contracted out for work instead of acting as employees directly.
gollark: The hierarchical direct democracy thing it describes doesn't seem like a very complete or effective coordination mechanism, and it seems like it could easily create unfreedom.
gollark: I disagree with this PDF, for purposes.

References
  1. Warton, John (1916). Wharton's Law Lexicon. Boston, Massachusetts: Stevens & Sons, Ltd. p. 2. Retrieved 23 March 2018.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.