Mo. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 474
Missouri Revised Statutes

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 474.030 (2026)

Partial intestacy

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MO-REVrevisor.mo.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

  474.030.  Partial intestacy. — If part but not all of the estate of a decedent is validly disposed of by will, the part not disposed of by will shall be distributed as provided herein for intestate estates.

­­--------

(L. 1955 p. 385 § 238)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1969–1999 · leading case: Earney v. Clay, 516 S.W.2d 59 (Mo. Ct. App. 1974).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Earney v. Clay, 516 S.W.2d 59 (Mo. Ct. App. 1974). · cites it 4× “Pared of its diffusion, the amended petition of plaintiffs sought: (1) to establish a resulting trust to that part of the testamentary trust which plaintiffs asseverated was in excess of the sum necessary to satisfy the terms of the testamentary trust and have the excess paid to…”
Est. of Pettit v. Levine, 657 S.W.2d 636 (Mo. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 2× “banc 1976); also see § 474.030 RSMo 1978. Clearly, the function of a trial court is to construe ambiguous provisions of a will, and not to reconstruct a will it has already determined is unambiguous 2 and in effect write a new will for the decedent under the guise of…”
Theodore Short Trust v. Fuller, 7 S.W.3d 482 (Mo. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “, § 469; Scott, Trusts § 430; Bogert, Law of Trusts § 76 4th ed. Hornbook Series), and if the sum constituting the resulting trust be not validly disposed of by will, it should be distributed as provided for partial intestacy.”
Payne v. Barnes, 638 S.W.2d 299 (Mo. Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 3× “Passing a reversion intestate created as part of an incomplete testamentary disposition has been justified under the partial intestacy statute, Section 474.030, RSMo 1978. Traders Nat. Bank of Kansas City v.”
Traders Nat'l Bank of Kansas City v. Levine, 528 S.W.2d 497 (Mo. Ct. App. 1975). · cites it 2× “of the will which might be subject to construction in the light of the presumption against intestacy and the absence of a detailed scheme of distribution which would evidence more clearly an intention to avoid partial intestacy makes this one of the unusual cases in which it…”
St. Louis Union Trust Co. v. Bethesda Gen. Hosp., 446 S.W.2d 823 (Mo. 1969). · cites it 2× “” It is argued the testatrix simply did not think about the excess income and did not express any intention concerning it; and that “the absence of such an expression is the operative criterion of the partial intestacy statute.”
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.