Palmer should not receive the inheritance from the will

1.On August 13th 1880 Francis B. Palmer made as well, where he left a small inheritance to his two daughters, Mrs. Rags and Mrs, Preston, and the rest was left to his grandson Elmer Palmer. 2.On March 1882, Frances married Mrs. Breeze, while entering an ante-nuptial contract, which states that instead of inheriting his estate upon his death she will have the support of his farm for the rest of her life. 3.Elmer lived with his grandfather until Frances died when I was 16. 4.He knew of his inheritance, but his grandfather was thinking of removing him from the will and to prevent that and to quickly receive inheritance he poisoned his grandfather. 5.Elmer said that because his grandfather is dead that his will should be put into effect because it is the letter of the law. 6.The statutes that regulate the making, proof and effect of wills cannot be controlled or modified. 7.These statues were created for the dead to legally dispose of their estate and objects that they leave behind. 8.Lawmakers created it so that the inheritor can inherit the property given to them, but they had not thought about if the inheritor murders the tester. 9.When something unforeseen happens it is the judges right to conclude that the parliament had not foreseen the consequences, and that they have the power to propose or disregard it 10. It is unreasonable to suppose that the legislation wanted the general law of passing property peacefully, intend for the murder of the ancestor to possess the property. 11. No one imagined someone would use the general language of the law in the manner of murdering their grandfather to receive their inheritance early. 12. All laws and contracts can be controlled by the fundamental Maxims. These maxims are; no profits for fraud, don"t take advantage of your wrongdoing, don't claim his own impropriety and don't use crime to get property. 13. In N.Y. the case of New York mutual life insurance company V. Armstrong, it was held that a person who takes on a life insurance policy on another person and then murders them couldn't receive any payment. 14. Mr. justice field said " no matter what Hunters motives for getting the life insurance, he forfeited any right to receive any payment when he murder the policyholder". 15. The same can be said when someone intentionally set fire to a building to receive insurance money. 16. There is no certainty that Elmer would survive Palmer, or that Palmer would not change his will to remove Elmer if he knew that Elmer was planning his murder. 17. Palmer made himself an heir by murdering his grandpa and then seeking his inheritance. 18. In Owens V. Owens a wife was convicted of aiding in the murder of her husband but she was still entitled to her dower. 19. The statute providing money for a wife who survived her husband and loses his support and protection. 20. There was no provision for a wife who made herself a widow. 21. The principle at the bottom of the maxim, volent non fit injuria, could be applied to this case as a widow should not for the purpose of receiving of property rights create her own widowhood. 22. Therefore, because Elmer murdered his grandfather he should not receive his inheritance Non-Controversial: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 Controversial: 9 is true because it is reasonable for the court to assume that if the benefactor of your will tries to kill you and you survive ,it is reasonable to assume that any sound and reasonable person would change their will and remove the person who tried to kill them from the will, so they would do it for them. They are protecting the rights of the murdered party by not letting his murderer receive and of the property that Francis worked hard to have. 10 is true because it is reasonable to assume that the legislation would not want an heir to murder their ancestor just to receive their would be inheritance. 11 is true because it is reasonable to assume that any reasonable and sound person would not imagine that someone would use the language of the law to inherit property by murdering their ancestor. 16 is true because any reasonable person would change his will so that his would be murderer would not inherit anything from them and there was also no guarantee that Elmer would have survived Palmer if Elmer had not been murdered.