solution

In 2011, a case arose that involved an alleged causa mortis gift. When Roger Hansen was alive, he owned estates that his nieces and their families were making payments on. Before he died, he wrote a draft of a will which stated that the nieces would own the properties upon his death. He delivered this draft to his attorney and was working on a final draft of his will. However, he died before the will was created. The court stated that for the debt relief to be a causa mortis gift, a document relieving the debts had to be delivered to the debtors themselves, not a third party. Thus, the three requirements of a valid gift were lacking. The nieces appealed. How do you think the court of appeals decided? Even though it was clear that Hansen intended to relieve the debts, would the alleged “gift” be invalid without proper delivery?