In re Estate of Armstrong, 155 S.W.3d 448 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2004, no pet.).
Daughter was appointed as the temporary administratrix of Testator’s
estate after she submitted an application to which she attached a copy
of Testator’s will. Alleged Common Law Wife (ACLW) contested asserting
Testator had revoked the will. Daughter agreed and thereafter claimed
that Testator died intestate and sought to be appointed as the
administratrix and for the court to determine heirship. Instead, the
probate court appointed a third party as a successor temporary
administrator because of the dispute over whether Testator was married
to ACLW at the time of his death. After complex procedural maneuvering,
the probate court determined in a motion in limine that ACLW was not
Testator’s wife and because she was not an interested person with
standing, denied her plea to intervene in the case to dispute the
payment of various estate expenses. Next, the court determined that she
was also precluded from presenting the issue of her marital status to a
jury in the heirship proceeding. The court reasoned that the in limine
finding that she was not married to Testator was conclusive for purposes
of the heirship proceeding.
After a careful review of similar Texas cases, the appellate court held
that the probate court’s determination of standing at the in limine
hearing was a collateral matter to the issue of the propriety of the
payment of administration expenses. Accordingly, this finding was not
conclusive for purposes of the heirship proceeding and ACLW was not
barred from seeking a jury trial in the heirship action.
Moral: A person seeking to establish a right to inherit as a common law
spouse must make careful strategic decisions on how to proceed to make
certain he or she is not inadvertently precluded from pursuing the
claim.