Code of Alabama
Ala. Code § 43-8-41 (2026)
Share of the Spouse.
✓ official Alabama Legislature (ALISON) text, current July 2026
The intestate share of the surviving spouse is as follows:
(1) If there is no surviving issue or parent of the decedent, the entire intestate estate;
(2) If there is no surviving issue but the decedent is survived by a parent or parents, the first $100,000.00 in value, plus one-half of the balance of the intestate estate;
(3) If there are surviving issue all of whom are issue of the surviving spouse also, the first $50,000.00 in value, plus one-half of the balance of the intestate estate;
(4) If there are surviving issue one or more of whom are not issue of the surviving spouse, one-half of the intestate estate;
(5) If the estate is located in two or more states, the share shall not exceed in the aggregate the allowable amounts under this chapter.
(Acts 1982, No. 82-399, §2-102.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9
cases, 1989–2017 · leading case: State ex rel. Alabama Policy Inst., 200 So. 3d 495 (Ala. 2015).
State ex rel. Alabama Policy Inst., 200 So. 3d 495 (Ala. 2015). “Code § 12-15-319; all laws that presuppose different people occupying the positions of ‘father,’ ‘mother,’ ‘husband,’ and ‘wife,’ e.”
Edward S. Ferguson V v. Katina Helen Hawe Critopoulos, 163 So. 3d 330 (Ala. 2014). “11 “The Court is cognizant that: (1) the purpose of the omitted spouse statute is to preserve the remainder of the will, while still providing for the omitted spouse; (2) by ruling that Katina is an omitted spouse, coupled with the provisions of Ala.Code 1975, § 43-8-41,…”
McKnight v. Way, 58 So. 3d 810 (Ala. Civ. App. 2010). “Code 1975, provides: “The part of the intestate estate not passing to the surviving spouse under section 43-8-41, [Ala.Code 1975,] or the entire intestate estate if there is no surviving spouse, passes as follows: “(1) To the issue of the decedent; if they are all of the same…”
D.L.J. v. B.R.J., 887 So. 2d 242 (Ala. Civ. App. 2003). “, § 43-8-41 and § 43-8-190, Ala.Code 1975.”
Moss v. Horton, 544 So. 2d 898 (Ala. 1989). “They contend that, because the new probate code abolished the estates of dower and curtesy [Code of Alabama (1975), § 43-8-57] and increased the surviving spouse’s share [Code of Alabama (1975), § 43-8-41], the legislature by implication changed the prior law.”
Reynolds v. Reynolds, 837 So. 2d 847 (Ala. Civ. App. 2002). “See Ala.Code 1975, § 43-8-41. The dispute in Moss arose because the spouse's intestate share had been calculated based upon the entire estate (minus an administrative expense) and then deducted before calculation of estate taxes.”
Ivey v. Est. of Ivey, 261 So. 3d 198 (Ala. 2017). “'s estate pursuant to § 43-8-41, Ala. Code 1975. On remand, the trial court may conduct any proceedings necessary to determine Edwyna's share of R.”
Ivey v. Est. of Ivey, 261 So. 3d 198 (Ala. 2017). “'s estate pursuant to § 43-8-41, Ala. Code 1975. On remand, the trial court may conduct any proceedings necessary to determine Edwyna's share of R.”
Bradford v. Brady, 2100203 (ala.civ.app. 4-15-2011), 85 So. 3d 399 (Ala. Civ. App. 2011). “§ 43-8-41. It appears that A.W.’s estate was never probated, leaving unanswered questions regarding whether the estate was worth more or less than $50,000 and whether the parcel became Jean’s sole property or whether title to the parcel was jointly held by Jean and the children.”
— Ala. Code § 43-8-41(1) — 1 case
Edward S. Ferguson V v. Katina Helen Hawe Critopoulos, 163 So. 3d 330 (Ala. 2014). “11 “The Court is cognizant that: (1) the purpose of the omitted spouse statute is to preserve the remainder of the will, while still providing for the omitted spouse; (2) by ruling that Katina is an omitted spouse, coupled with the provisions of Ala.Code 1975, § 43-8-41,…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.