In Re Estate of James M. McKinney

Syllabus

In this appeal, we construe a will. The trial court determined that the will disinherited one of the testator's two daughters by necessary implication when the testator identified only one daughter as his child in the \Family\ clause and did not indicate a specific intent to include the other daughter in the residue clause that disposed of his estate. Upon our de novo review, we hold that inclusive language in the family clause does not operate to disinherit one daughter when the residue clause defined \children\ differently, such that both of the testator's daughters are beneficiaries under the will. We therefore reverse the judgment of the chancery court and remand the matter for further proceedings.