Colorado § 15-11-101 - Intestate estate.

§ 15-11-101. Intestate estate.

(1) Any part of a decedent's estate not effectively disposed of by will or otherwise passes by intestate succession to the decedent's heirs as prescribed in this code, except as modified by the decedent's will.

(2) A decedent by will may expressly exclude or limit the right of an individual or class to succeed to property of the decedent passing by intestate succession. If that individual or a member of that class survives the decedent, the share of the decedent's intestate estate to which that individual or class would have succeeded passes as if that individual or each member of that class had disclaimed the intestate share.

Source: L. 94: Entire part R&RE, p. 976, § 3, effective July 1, 1995. L. 2022: (2) amended, (SB 22-092), ch. 60, p. 271, § 1, effective August 10.

Editor's note: This section is similar to former § 15-11-101 as it existed prior to 1995.

ANNOTATION

Law reviews. For article on administration of estates, see 10 Rocky Mt. L. Rev. 288 (1938). For note, "Non-Testamentary Transfers Effective at Death", see 24 Rocky Mt. L. Rev. 365 (1952). For article, "Administration of Intestate Estates", see 29 Rocky Mt. L. Rev. 571 (1957). For article, "An Ecclesiastical Role for the Lawyer in a Secular Society", see 44 Den. L.J. 275 (1967). For article, "Probate and Non-probate Distribution Issues in the Case of A Murder/Suicide", see 17 Colo. Law. 1061 (1988).

Annotator's note. Since § 15-11-101 is similar to repealed laws antecedent to CSA, C. 176, § 1, relevant cases construing those provisions have been included in the annotations to this section.

Escheats and forfeitures are not favored by law, and a doubt as to whether property is subject to escheat is to be resolved against the state. Danks v. Herrmann, 94 Colo. 546, 31 P.2d 912 (1934).

Section inoperative where will disposes of the estate. When the existence of a will disposing of the estate is once conceded, no heir can establish any rights by inheritance on simple proof of descent. Under such circumstances the statutes of intestate succession do not become operative. Hall v. Cowles' Estate, 15 Colo. 343, 25 P. 705 (1890).

Where a will clearly limits participation in the estate to the devisees and unambiguously excludes other family members from participation, the omitted heirs cannot participate by intestacy in the distribution of the trust even if no devisee survives the termination of the trust. In re Estate of Walter, 97 P.3d 188 (Colo. App. 2003).

The right to inherit is statutory and the statute which governs is embraced in §§ 15-11-101 to 15-11-113 inclusive. Wilson v. Wilson, 95 Colo. 159, 33 P.2d 969 (1934).

The policy of our law is to have property descend to the heirs in the manner provided in this article. Danks v. Herrmann, 94 Colo. 546, 31 P.2d 912 (1934).

Remainder not devised or bequeathed shall be distributed as estate of an intestate. Provisions of a will reviewed, and held to dispose of a life estate in the property only, being silent with respect to the remainder, which was not devised or bequeathed, is to be distributed in the same manner as the estate of an intestate. Blatt v. Blatt, 79 Colo. 57, 243 P. 1099 (1926).

A testator is presumed to know the laws of the state in which he lives concerning the descent and distribution of intestate property. Blatt v. Blatt, 79 Colo. 57, 243 P. 1099 (1926).

The law of an intestate's actual domicile at the time of his death governs the intestate succession of his property, when it is all situate in that state. Blatt v. Blatt, 79 Colo. 57, 243 P. 1099 (1926).

Heirs cannot complain of steps taken by intestate to deprive them of inheritance. During the lifetime of the intestate, his property was subject to his control and disposition. If it was his pleasure to take such steps as would increase the inheritance of this minor grandchild, he could do so, either by adoption or testamentary provision, and his heirs, whom he could have deprived of any inheritance at all, cannot complain. Hughes v. Jones, 89 Colo. 455, 3 P.2d 1074 (1931); In re Wilson's Estate, 95 Colo. 159, 33 P.2d 969 (1934).