Admissibility of Extrinsic Evidence Self-Quiz

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Doug’s will left property to “my niece Brooke, living in Florida.” In reality, Doug had a niece named Sunny living in Florida, and a niece named Brooke living in Texas. Extrinsic evidence showed that Doug had a much closer relationship with Sunny than with Brooke.
Choice 1 The court will award the property to Brooke.
Choice 2 The court will award the property to Sunny.
Choice 3 The court will reject both and the property will pass pursuant to the intestacy statutes.
Jesse’s will devised “my former home located at 1215 Tequila Parkway.” In reality, Jesse’s home was located at 1512 Tequila Parkway. Extrinsic evidence showed that there was no 1215 Tequila Parkway and Jesse’s address in other areas of the will, the phone book and mail was 1512 Tequila Parkway. The court will reject the devise and the property will pass pursuant to the intestacy statutes
True
False
Jessica’s will bequeaths “the sum of five hundred dollars ($5,000) to my brother Herbert.” Under the traditional view, parol evidence would be admissible to clarify this patent ambiguity.
True
False

© 2003 - 2018 National Paralegal College