Steger v. Muenster Drilling Co., Inc., 134 S.W.3d 359 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2003, pet. denied).
Husband’s will granted Wife a life estate in all his property
including extensive powers such as the authority to manage, control, and
lease the property for all purposes. Wife entered into mineral leases
with secondary terms extending for as long as oil or gas is produced in
paying quantities. Wife died in 1960. One of the remainder beneficiaries
received a secondary life estate. This remainder beneficiary also
entered into mineral leases extending for as long as paying quantities
of oil or gas are produced. In a similar manner to the devise to Wife,
Husband’s will granted this remainder beneficiary the power to enter
into leases. This beneficiary died in 1993. In 1996, Child, the sole
surviving remainder beneficiary, questioned the continued validity of
some of these leases. Child asserts that Husband’s will did not
authorize Wife and the remainder beneficiary to execute oil and gas
leases extending beyond their lifetimes.
The appellate court agreed with the trial court that the express terms
of Husband’s will granted Wife and the remainder beneficiary the right
to enter into these long-term leases. The court studied the language of
Husband’s will, especially the phrases “for all purposes” and “whatever
nature” which followed the grants to the life tenants of the power to
lease the property. Construing the language of Husband’s will according
to the ordinary meaning of the words used, the court held that Husband’s
will unambiguously authorized Wife and the remainder beneficiary to
execute any type of oil and gas lease including leases that extended
beyond their lifetimes. The court rejected Child’s argument that because
Wife and the remainder beneficiary could enter into leases only while
they were alive, they could not create a lease which would remain
effective after their deaths.
Moral: Regardless of the clarity of language a testator uses in a will,
the will may still be attacked on the ground that it should not be given
effect as it is written. Any additional guidance which the testator
provides in the will could reduce such claims. In this case, for
example, Husband could have added the phrase, “including leases which
extend beyond the life tenant’s lifetime.”