Preston v. Chabot - 138 Vt. 170, 412 A.2d 930 (1980)

Rule:

A husband who murders his wife should not be better off property-wise merely because he holds property by the entireties rather than some other way.

Facts:

The testator and his first wife concurrently owned real property as tenants in the entirety. The testator murdered his first wife, who died intestate. The only property that was probated was her personal property. After the testator served his jail time, he remarried. He re-deeded the property and became tenants in the entirety with his new wife. Upon his death, his children discovered the existence of the property. The children filed a declaratory judgment action, seeking a constructive trust for their benefit over the property. The trial court declared a constructive trust on behalf of the children. Defendants, executor and beneficiary, sought review of the decision, arguing that the constructive trust was barred by laches and that the testator received an undivided interest in the property upon his first wife's death.

Issue:

Did the trial court err in declaring that the property was held in trust for the children as the heirs of the first wife's estate? 

Answer:

No.

Conclusion:

On appeal, the court affirmed the trial court's judgment declaring that the property was held in trust for the children as the heirs of the first wife's estate. The court concluded that the testator should not have been allowed to benefit by killing his first wife. The court found that the first wife's share belonged to her children in a constructive trust. The court determined that defendants were not prejudiced by the imposition of the constructive trust and were not prejudiced by the timing of the action, so that the defense of laches did not apply. The court found that although the testator and his first wife were tenants in the entirety, they became tenants in common after the testator killed her.