In the Matter of the Estate of Chester

Summary

The court held that the decedent's son was a pretermitted heir under the decedent's holographic will because the will neither mentioned him nor expressed an intent to disinherit him in strong and convincing language. The court ruled that extrinsic evidence could not establish intentional omission because no ambiguity appeared on the face of the will. It vacated the intermediate appellate decision, reversed the trial court, and remanded for distribution under the pretermitted-heir statute.