Opinion ID: 1969713
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Legacy Classification

Text: Legacies may be general, demonstrative, or specific. See Wyman v. Roesner, 439 A.2d 516, 519-20 (D.C.1981). We define each type of legacy according to the specificity of the source and the availability of alternative sources in the event of a deficiency. A general legacy may be obtained from any source of the estate. Id. at 520. A demonstrative legacy is designated by a particular source and may be satisfied by other sources from the estate if the identified source is insufficient. Id. A specific legacy is also derived from a particularized source but may not be satisfied elsewhere. Id. at 519. We classify a particular legacy as general, demonstrative, or specific according to the testator's intent. Id. at 520. In construing a will, the testator's intent is the guiding principlethe `polestar.' Id. A crucial aspect of this determination is the existence of a presumption that the testator did not intend to create a specific legacy. Id. Courts disfavor specific bequests, for if the designated property is not part of the estate at death, the gift generally will be lost through ademption by extinction. Id. The intent to create a specific legacy must therefore be especially clear. Id. To discern the testator's intent, we focus on the language of the will. Id. Two consequences follow from emphasis upon the testator's language. First, prior cases interpreting language from different wills executed by different testators provide minimal guidance. Id. Second, consideration of extrinsic evidence is only permissible to resolve ambiguity. Id. The parties here agree that extrinsic evidence is unavailable in any event.