Friday, September 21, 2012

Ford v. Ford case brief

Ford v. Ford
307 Md. 105, 512 A.2d 389 (1986)

-Respondent (D) murdered her mother by stabbing her 40 times.
-Under the criminal law D was found guilt of murder in the first degree, however D was also found not criminally responsible by reason of insanity.

-The trial court in which the will was admitted to probate ruled that Petitioner be declared the heir of the estate.
-Appeal: the Circuit Court reversed and decided that Respondent was entitled to the property. Petitioner now appeals.

Can an individual who kills another share in the distribution of the decedent’s estate when the individual was insane at the time of the killing?

Yes. Affirmed.
-The slayer’s rule does not apply in the context of a killing committed by an insane individual because for a homicide to be felonious in the context of the rule it must be one for which the killer is criminally responsible under Maryland’s criminal insanity test.
-Even though a killing may be intentional if it is not felonious the slayer's rule does not apply and the individual may share in the distribution of the estate.

The Slayer's Rule, which prevents an individual who commits a felonious and intentional homicide from sharing in the distribution of the decedent’s estate, is not applicable when the killer was not criminally responsible for their conduct at the time they committed the homicide.

-The slayer’s rule provides that a person who kills another may not share in the distribution of the decedent’s estate when the homicide is felonious and intentional.
-The individual may share in the distribution when the homicide is unintentional even thought it may be the result of gross negligence.
-This rule is a reflection of the common-law principle of equity that no one shall be permitted to profit by his own fraud, to take advantage of his own wrong, to found any claim upon his own iniquity, or to acquire property by his own crime.
-Slayer's Rule is found inapplicable when a person is criminally insane and allowing the individual to inherit is consistent with principles of equity.


-Respondent (D) should be disqualified as devisee under her mother’s will because an actor’s conduct remains wrongful notwithstanding a finding of insanity.
-An insane killer can commit a felonious act since the finding of insanity is not tantamount to an absence of mens rea or lack of intent to commit a crime. Therefore the slayer’s rule, which bars an individual from profiting from his own wrongs, is still applicable.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Exploring Career Paths: What Can You Do with a Juris Doctor Degree?

Earning a Juris Doctor (JD) degree is a significant accomplishment, opening a wide array of career paths beyond the traditional legal practi...