a. Primeland.

Lonnie (L) has a life esatate in Primeland, he has the usual rights and duties to do with that land including receiving all the usual profits for that particular land and is responsible for the property taxes.

A person with life estate in real property has an interest for his life in tht real estate and is entitled to all the normal uses and profits of the land and is liable to pay for all the normal outgoings on the land including paying for the property taxes. A life tenant cannot commit waste whether voluntary, permissive or ameliorative waste.

Here, Donnna’s will, which from the facts is properly executed, bequeathed L a life interest in Primeland. Therefore L has a life interest and is liable for the property taxes until his death. L will be able to receive all the usual profits including the income from the sale of crops harvested. He had a duty to maintain the land and not commit waste.

b. Daniel (D) and Kay (K)’s interest in Primeland.

D and K have a vested remainder in Primeland, they do not currently have any duties and are not entitled to any of the income from the land currently.

A vested remainder is a future interest in land that comes into being after the natural expiration of the preceding estate, with ascertainable beneficiaries. The holders of a vested remainder are not entitled to the profits of the land until the receive their interest as until then they expected beneficiaries.

Here, D and K have a vested remainder in Primeland. Per D’s will, and as explained above, L has a life estate and upon his death, Primeland is conveyed to D and K. They therefore have a vested remainder, being a future interest, and their interst is vested because they are ascertainable beneficiaries. However the do not have any rights and duties regarding the land until they actually acquire their interest upon L’s death. They are also therefore not entitled to any portion of the income derived from the farming operations as that income belongs to L until his death, as explained above.

c. Personal Property Distribution List.

D’s January 2023 Personal Property Distribution list is not effective under Virginia law to transfer the listed assets to the recipients identified in the document.

In Virginia, a document can be incorporated by reference into a will so that it in effect is read as part of the will. Further, in Virginia, a testator can have a separate list of personal property that can be kept by her and be amended by her, provided it is dated by her. Also, this separte list of personal property can be made before, during or after the excution of the will. This rule only applies to personal property.

Here, D’s will provides that she gives certain personal property to those specified in a separate list. After D’s death in February 2023, Barbar (B) found a handwritten list titled “Personal Property Distribution” from D’s notebook dated January 18, 2023. It identified some items of personal property but also included “stock” which is not personal property. Further it was not signed by D. As a result, this list is not effective under Virginia law to be incorporated by reference into D’s will.

d. The remaining items.

1. The stamp collection.

Roanoke Valley SPCA is entitled to the stamp collection because D’s will expressly bequeathed this item to them.

2. The postcard collection.

The postcard collection will go to Daniel and Kay, because the personal property distribution list is ineffective under Virginia law, and because of this, the post card collection which was identified on the ineffective list, falls into the residue estate. Under D’s will, daniel and Kay are to receive the residue of the estate and so they are entitled to the postcard collection.

3. The piper stock.

Again, Daniel and Kay are entitled to piper stock, for the same reasons set out above regarding the postcard collection.

4. The residue of the estate.

Daniel and Kay are entitled to the residue of D’s estate because her will expressly provides this.

(a) Lonnie, as a life tenant of Farmland has certain rights and duties to maintain the premises for the remainderman.

A life tenant is a present possessory interest in real property of another, that affords that person the right to live at the property for their life. A life tenant owes several duties to remainderman. A life tenant may not commit waste, voluntary (affirmative action causing waste), permissive (allowing the property to fall into disrepair), or ameliorative waste (improvements made to the property). Further, a life tenant is required to pay their share of the property taxes, the interest on the mortgage, if any. Essentially, the life tenant may not take any action, or fail to take appropriate action, that may damage the rights of remaindermen.

Therefore, Lonnie does have an obligation to pay the property taxes because that is an inherent obligation of a life tenant, and he may not take action or fail to take such action that would injure the rights of the remaindermen. A failure to pay property taxes may cause a tax lien on the property in which the government, or a purchasing party through a tax sale, may foreclosure on the property.

(b)Daniel and Kay do not currently have any rights or duties in connection with Primeland, and are not entitled to all or any portion of the income derived from the farming operations because their interest in Primeland is a future interest.

One who has a future interest in property will take the property at the natural expiration of the precedent estate. A remainderman who's interest is certain to vest, and is not subject to dimunulation or divestment has an indfeasibly vested remainder. Remaindermen to not have any current interest in the property, and must wait until the natural expiration of the precededing estate.

Daniel and Kay and an indefeasibly vested remainder in Primeland because their interest is certain to vest, and is not subject to dimuniation or divestment. Donna's will states that Lonnie has a life estate in Primeland, and after his death, the property will transfer to Daniel and Kay.

Therefore, although Daniel and Kay have a future interest that is certain to vest, while Lonnie is still alive they do not have any current interest in the property or its profits.

Further, Daniel and Kay would have to prove that Lonnie is committing waste on the property or otherwise doing or failing to do something that injures their future interest to be able to bring a valid claim against Lonnie or assert their possessory right. While the facts state that Lonnie's physical and mental health were declining, the facts do not indicate that he has done, or failed to do, anything that is likely to damage the property to the detriment of the remainder.

(c)No, Donna's Personal Property Distribution list is insufficient under Virginia law to transfer the listed assets because it is missing her signature.

In Virginia, a testator may create a seperate list identifying a distribution of personal property that is seperate from the will if the list complies with certain formalities. The list (1) must be referenced in the testator's will; (2) must be signed by the testator; and (3) must reasonable describe the beneficiaries and the property to be conveyed. A personal property list may be created, amended, or altered after the execution of the will and does not need to be probate to be effective, as long as the require aforementioned requirements are met.

Here, Donna attempted to create a seperate personal property list from her validly executed will. She referneced the document in her will ("I give certain personal property to those specified in a separate list") and sufficiently described the beneficiaries and the personal property to be conveyed. The list does not contain Donna's signature, which is a required element for a seperate personal property list to be effective.

Although the Commonwealth has a dispensing formalities statute that allows certain statutory requirements to be ignored when there is clear and convincing evidence of a testator's intention, the curing statute may not be used when the defect is a missing signature.

Therefore, the lack of Donna's signature causes the personal property list to be ineffective and the dispensing formailities statute cannot save the document because the defect is a missing signature.

(d) Because the list does not comply with the requisite requirements for personal property to be distributed, Donna's property will be distributed in accordance with her will.

The Roanoke Valley SPCA is entitled to Donna's collection of stamps in accordance with the provision of her will. Specific bequests in a valid will are to be given full force and effect. There are no facts indicating the the stamps are no longer in Donna's possession such that ademption could apply. Thus, the Roanoke Valley SPCA is entitled to the stamp collection.

Daniel and Kay are entitled to the remaining items: the postcard collection, the Piper stock, and the residue of the estate. Because the postcard collection and the Piper stock were listed on the seperate list of personal property that is ineffective, the postcard collection and Piper stock will instead pass through the residuary clause of Donna's will. Under Donna's will, Daniel and Kay are entiteld to the residue portion of the estate.

Further, under Donna's will, Daniel and Kay are the residuary takers. Although the personal property list states that Donna's remaining personal property should go to Barbara, the written list and the provisions contained therein are ineffective.

Therefore, in accordance with Donna's will, the Roanoke Valley SPCA will be entitled to the stamps and Daniel and Kay will receive the residue, the postcard collection, and the Piper stock.