Opinion ID: 1933462
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The trial court cited and used statements from In Re Estate of Zang, 255 Iowa 736, 123 N.W.2d 883 from which we quote:

Text: Courts, of course, have no authority to make or remake the will of a testator. The function of the court is to determine whether there is any ambiguity in the provisions of the will, and then to admit extrinsic evidence to show the intent of the testator, and to aid in resolving any doubt arising from the language used in the will.    Certain accredited canons are generally applied in interpreting wills which do not themselves unmistakably reveal the maker's intention. They are sometimes stated as follows: (1) The law will impute to a testator's words such a meaning as, under all the circumstances, will conform to his probable intention and be most agreeable to reason and justice. [Citation] (2) In determining the testator's intention the court should place itself as nearly as possible in his position, and hence should take into consideration the situation of the testator and the facts and circumstances surrounding him at the time the will was executed,   . (loc. cit. 738 and 739, 123 N.W. 2d 884 and 885) In interpreting an instrument of this kind the instrument must be taken by its four corners and each paragraph read in the light of the other provisions. In Re Estate of Ritter, 239 Iowa 788, 797, 32 N.W. 2d 666, 2 A.L.R.2d 1301. As noted in the Zang case, supra, the facts and circumstances surrounding testatrix at the time the will was executed may be considered. The will was not drafted by an Iowa lawyer, but it was drawn for an Iowa resident. The repugnancies between the words joint tenants and the other provisions in the will and sometimes in the same sentence as in paragraph numbered Fifth are apparent. Appearing as they do the technical words joint tenants are not entitled to the full weight that they might be entitled to if used by an experienced Iowa draftsman. The words are foreign to the other express language of the will. II. In paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 of the will the benefits are conditional on surviving distribution in the estate. The trial court held that the words survive distribution meant surviving the death of the testatrix and not actual distribution during the probate of the estate. There has been no appeal from this holding and discussion here is unnecessary.