disinherit

(redirected from disinherits)
Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus.

Disinherit

To cut off from an inheritance. To deprive someone, who would otherwise be an heir to property or another right, of his or her right to inherit.

A parent who wishes to disinherit a child may specifically state so in a will.

disinherit

v. to intentionally take actions to guarantee that a person who would normally inherit upon a party's death (wife, child or closest relative) would get nothing. Usually this is done by a provision in a will or codicil (amendment) to a will which states that a specific person is not to take ("my son, Robert Hands, shall receive nothing," "no descendant of my hated brother shall take anything on account of my death.") It is not enough to merely ignore or not mention a child in a will since he/she may become a "pretermitted heir" (a child apparently forgotten.) A spouse can be disinherited only to the extent that the state law allows. A writer of a will can also disinherit anyone who challenges the validity of the will in what is called an "in terrorem" clause, which might say "I leave anyone who challenges this will or any part of it one dollar." (See: heir, pretermitted heir, will, codicil, descent, descent and distribution)

disinherit

verb abandon, abrogate, annul, cast out, cut off, cut off from inheritance, cut out of one's will, deprive of hereditary succession, disaffirm, discard, disclaim, disendow, disentitle, disherit, disown, dispossess of hereditary right, divest, exclude from inheritance, forfeit, forsake, nullify, oust, quash, recall, recant, renounce, replace, repudiate, rescind, retract, revoke, take away from, turn out, withdraw, withhold
Associated concepts: disinherit a husband, disinherit a wife, disinherit an adopted child, disinherit pretermitted children
See also: adeem, confiscate, deprive, disown, reject

disinherit

to deprive an heir or next of kin of inheritance or right to inherit. In some systems the testator may be restricted in the exercise of this right as in Scotland; see LEGITIM.
References in periodicals archive ?
Obviously, no such maneuver can help a wrongdoer give effect to a will procured by undue influence or fraud, since an heir could challenge the effectiveness of the whole testamentary instrument that disinherits heirs; if the challenge succeeded, the negative will would fall with the rest of the estate plan.
113) More recent cases applying negative will statutes in Colorado and Nevada have now taken that approach, enforcing negative wills that operated to disinherit all heirs apart from named beneficiaries.
117) To the extent that the author of a global negative will did truly aim to exclude all heirs, and not just nonmarital descendants, it stands to reason that the provision ordinarily traces to feelings of hostility--what else could inspire a testator to disinherit all of her relations?
125) Nevertheless, the Code's strict form of negative will statute "requires express language, not just uncertainty," to disinherit an heir.
On the one hand, we might assume that if a testator wished to disinherit the descendants of heirs, she could convey that intent expressly, by expanding the scope of the negative will: "My child, A, and A's descendants, are to take no part of my estate.
Yet, once we determine that a negative will implicitly extends to descendants of the disinherited heir, we have little reason to assume that the testator's intent to disinherit an heir of the lower generation would depend on the survival Eel non of the disinherited heir in the higher generation.
160) A testator could create a trust for a (voidable) capricious purpose, or for an otherwise valid noncharitable purpose that the testator wishes capriciously to overfund, (161) and then disinherit all heirs in the hope of denying standing to anyone who might challenge the legality of the terms of the trust.
3d at 192 (failing to explore the facts that prompted the testator to include the global negative will, and conceding that the testator "may not have intended that his estate would escheat," but insisting that the court was "limited by the clear and plain meaning of his words"); In re Melton, 272 R3d at 677 (failing to explore the facts and rejecting the suggestion that the prior death of the intended beneficiary would have changed the testator's intent to disinherit his relatives as "speculat[ion]").
12, 2001) C[T]his one dollar bequest appears to be a nominal sum which was intended to disinherit the individual named.
Then Anna Nicole's will would not only disinherit future born children but would name an alternate beneficiary to the future born children.