A decedent leaves a residence to a friend who predeceased the testator; the residue goes to a charity. Extrinsic evidence suggests the decedent wanted the friend’s family to live there for the care of a disabled child. If there is no applicable statute, and both charity and child claim the residence, who should receive it?

• A. The charity
• B. The child
• C. The state
• D. The friend’s spouse

Answer: (A)

When a specific bequest to a person who predeceases the testator lapses, and there is no anti-lapse statute or provision in the will to substitute another beneficiary, the lapsed gift falls into the residue. The residue then passes to the residuary beneficiary named in the will. Here, the residence was given to a friend who dies before the testator, and the only residuary bequest is to a charity. Without any statute to substitute the friend’s family, the house becomes part of the estate’s residue and thus goes to the charity.

Extrinsic evidence suggesting the testator wanted the friend’s family to live there to care for a disabled child does not create a trust or override the lapse in the absence of a specific provision or applicable statute. It’s not enough to redirect title to the child or recognize a constructive or resulting trust in favor of the family.

So the charity takes the residence. The state would only obtain the property if there were no valid will or heirs, which isn’t the case here, and the friend’s spouse has no basis to claim the residence under the given facts.