terrorem clause in texas and old vs new will

[datant69]

ok needing some help on a freinds issue dealing with this. new will is 4ish yrs newer then old. of course $ is involved and the person that is challenging the will with the clause is wanting to take a majority of the funds in one account. I told my freind the next step is take the death cert/new will with clause to the bank. since its a lending institution and this isnt anything new in regards to fighting over a deceased assets then i think a terrorem clause will should win in texas. Financial institutes are audited and have to follow laws and that includes financial and recognize civil or issues regarding wills. i can see the fight someone who isnt smart or think of what the outcome maybe. my view is to not fight and accept whats given, im not involved or stand to gain any financial rewards so this isnt personal to me in that regard. So help me understand what arguement an attorney may try in this regard



So any and all info is appreciated, thanks in advance

 

[datant69]

another thing this involves multiple bank accounts and no assets involving anything other then $. one account has the majority of the money in it and this person challenging the will is beneficiary of the account with the most money in it.

 

[army judge]

ok needing some help on a freinds issue dealing with this. new will is 4ish yrs newer then old. of course $ is involved and the person that is challenging the will with the clause is wanting to take a majority of the funds in one account. I told my freind the next step is take the death cert/new will with clause to the bank. since its a lending institution and this isnt anything new in regards to fighting over a deceased assets then i think a terrorem clause will should win in texas. Financial institutes are audited and have to follow laws and that includes financial and recognize civil or issues regarding wills. i can see the fight someone who isnt smart or think of what the outcome maybe. my view is to not fight and accept whats given, im not involved or stand to gain any financial rewards so this isnt personal to me in that regard. So help me understand what arguement an attorney may try in this regard



So any and all info is appreciated, thanks in advance

The correct term is "in terrorem clause".

"In terrorem" is Latin for for "in fear,".
It is an attempt to keep people from challenging the legality (or fairness) of the will or any part of it.
The effect being to cut the protestor out of the will by gifting him or her a token dollar, in lieu of getting a more robust bequest.

Courts have ruled that merely putting in a claim against the estate is not a legal challenge to the will itself, and is permissible without being harshly penalized.

A will must be probated.

Your friend should discuss his concerns with a lawyer.

By the way, a person either has a will, or they don't.

The court isn't concerned with 20 prior wills, just the most recent will.