Lorenz v. Janssen, 116 S.W.3d 421 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2003, no pet.).
Husband and Wife executed a joint will in 1941 providing for the
survivor to receive a life estate in all the property with a life estate
passing to their children upon the survivor’s death. The remainder
passed to the “natural children” of Husband and Wife’s children. In
1956, the court declared that two children adopted by Daughter (“Adopted
Grandchildren”) would not qualify as “natural children” and thus would
not share in the remainder of the estate. Wife died in 1970 and the 1941
will was again probated with specific reference to the 1956 court
action. Accordingly, when Daughter died in 1986 her interest passed to
her surviving siblings instead of Adopted Grandchildren. In the present
action, Adopted Grandchildren seek to set aside the 1956 judgment and
the order admitting Wife’s will to probate. The trial court rejected
Adopted Grandchildren’s claims.
The appellate court affirmed. The court held that the 1956 declaratory
judgment was res judicata and thus precluded Adopted Grandchildren’s
claims. The court determined that the court which rendered the 1956
judgment had subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate Adopted
Grandchildren’s rights because the 1941 will was contractual. The 1941
will contractual because it (1) did not give the survivor an absolute or
unconditional gift and (2) the remaining estate of the first to die and
the estate of the last to die was treated as a single estate and jointly
disposed of by both testators in the secondary dispositive provisions of
the will.
Moral: Regardless of how much time has elapsed after a probate decision
was rendered, someone may attempt to set it aside. The doctrine of res
judicata will often be available to stop a relitigation of a
finally-adjudicated claim.