BELLEVILLE, ST. CLAIR COUNTY, ILLINOIS, METRO EAST LAW FIRM SUCCESSFULLY PROVIDED REPRESENTATION IN AN ESTATE ADMINISTRATION THAT INCLUDED HAVING A COPY OF A LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT OF A DECEDENT ADMITTED TO PROBATE FOR ESTATE ADMINISTRATION REBUTTING THE PRESUMPTION THAT IF THE ORIGINAL LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT COULD NOT BE FOUND, THAT THE TESTATOR HAD INTENTIONALLY DESTROYED IT, AVAILABLE TO REPRESENT CLIENTS FROM ALBION, EDWARDS COUNTY, MOUNT CARMEL, WABASH COUNTY AND OLNEY, RICHLAND COUNTY, ILLINOIS. IF AN ORIGINAL LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT CANNOT BE LOCATED, THERE IS A PRESUMPTION THAT THE LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT HAD BEEN DESTROYED. IF A LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT HAD BEEN DESTROYED, THAT COULD SUBJECT THE ESTATE TO INTESTACY OR THAT THE INTESTATE STATUTE PROVIDES AS TO THE TESTAMENTARY DISPOSITION OF THE NET ASSETS. WE TIMELY FILED A MOTION TO ADMIT COPY OF LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT FOR PURPOSES OF ESTATE ADMINISTRATION AND, THROUGH A PROCESS OF MEETINGS AND NEGOTIATIONS, WERE ABLE TO OBTAIN ENTRIES OF APPEARANCE AND CONSENTS FROM THE HEIRS, EVEN AN HEIR THAT WAS NOT PROVIDED FOR OR DISINHERITED IN THE WILL, SUCH THAT THE COURT GRANTED OUR MOTION TO ADMIT COPY OF LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT.

BELLEVILLE, ST. CLAIR COUNTY, ILLINOIS, METRO EAST LAW FIRM SUCCESSFULLY PROVIDED REPRESENTATION IN AN ESTATE ADMINISTRATION THAT INCLUDED HAVING A COPY OF A LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT OF A DECEDENT ADMITTED TO PROBATE FOR ESTATE ADMINISTRATION REBUTTING THE PRESUMPTION THAT IF THE ORIGINAL LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT COULD NOT BE FOUND, THAT THE TESTATOR HAD INTENTIONALLY DESTROYED IT, AVAILABLE TO REPRESENT CLIENTS FROM ALBION, EDWARDS COUNTY, MOUNT CARMEL, WABASH COUNTY AND OLNEY, RICHLAND COUNTY, ILLINOIS. IF AN ORIGINAL LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT CANNOT BE LOCATED, THERE IS A PRESUMPTION THAT THE LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT HAD BEEN DESTROYED. IF A LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT HAD BEEN DESTROYED, THAT COULD SUBJECT THE ESTATE TO INTESTACY OR THAT THE INTESTATE STATUTE PROVIDES AS TO THE TESTAMENTARY DISPOSITION OF THE NET ASSETS. WE TIMELY FILED A MOTION TO ADMIT COPY OF LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT FOR PURPOSES OF ESTATE ADMINISTRATION AND, THROUGH A PROCESS OF MEETINGS AND NEGOTIATIONS, WERE ABLE TO OBTAIN ENTRIES OF APPEARANCE AND CONSENTS FROM THE HEIRS, EVEN AN HEIR THAT WAS NOT PROVIDED FOR OR DISINHERITED IN THE WILL, SUCH THAT THE COURT GRANTED OUR MOTION TO ADMIT COPY OF LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT.

A LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT OF THE DECEDENT TREATED THE CHILDREN DIFFERENTLY. ONE CHILD WAS COMPLETELY DISINHERITED. WITH RESPECT TO TWO OTHER CHILDREN, ONE WAS TO RECEIVE CERTAIN ASSETS OF A BUSINESS AND THE OTHER WAS TO RECEIVE A HOME. WE ADVISED THE HEIRS THAT OUR RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE THAT PURSUANT TO A FAMILY SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT THEY COULD AGREE BETWEEN THEMSELVES IF THEY WISH TO DIVIDE THE REAL AND PERSONAL PROPERTY DIFFERENTLY ONCE THEY WERE ENTITLED TO RECEIVE IT AND AFTER CONCLUSION OF THE ESTATE ADMINISTRATION.

Blake Behme Gilbreth Links, P.C.