1.       In deciding how much Ted can dispose of by will, we begin with the Iowa account.  This is money that Ted earned in Iowa and under Iowa law is his separate property.  It remained his separate property when they moved to California.  At Ted's death, however, it might become quasi-community property (QCP).  QCP is personal property acquired by a married couple outside of California that would have been CP if earned here.  The $100,000 in the Iowa account is personal property.  And Ted acquired it while married to Sandy.  So California will treat it as QCP at Ted's death.  Because they were still married at the time of Ted's death, under California law one-half of the QCP belonged to Ted at death and the other half to Sandy, so Ted was entitled to give away by will his half ($50,000) of the Iowa account.

          This rule does not apply to real property outside California.  Real property in Iowa is subject to Iowa law, so the cabin remains Ted's separate property.  Iowa almost certainly has some type of spousal share.  Assuming it's one-third, Sandy will get $20,000 and the remaining $40,000 value of the cabin is part of Ted's estate and he had the right to dispose of it by will.

          The gold watch was an inheritance and is therefore Ted's separate property under California law.  So he was free to give it away by will.

          The money in the retirement account was earned by Ted while working in California and while married to Sandy.  All property earned in California during marriage is CP.  At death, the community is split and each spouse is entitled to his or her half.  This gives Sandy $100,000 from the retirement account and it left Ted free to dispose of the rest by will.

2.       The first possibility is that the form will is an attested will.  Ted was clearly over 18 years and there is no evidence of lack of capacity or other basis for a contest.  Although some people would consider joining the Hare Krishnas as being somewhat odd, that fact by itself does not indicate lack of testamentary capacity or insane delusion.  So as far as we can tell, he was competent to make a will.

          An attested will must, first of all, be in writing.  Both printing and handwriting count as "writing," so that requirement is met.  Next, it must be signed by the testator.  Ted signed the will.  Finally, it must be witnessed by two people who are present at the same time and witness (1) the testator signing the will or (2) the testator acknowledging either the will or his signature.  Here there are no witnesses at all.  Until recently California required the execution of a will to "substantially comply" with the statutory requirements, and this seems to be too far off the mark. 

           Recently, California adopted a version of the UPC harmless error rule, which provides that a writing can be probated--even when not properly witnessed--if there is clear and convincing evidence that, at the time the testator signed the document, the testator intended it to be his will.  Here, Ted bought a will form, filled it out, and signed it.  He then put it in his safe, which suggests he believed it was an important document.  It's a close call, but I don't think the evidence that he intended this to be his will meets the high standard of "clear and convincing."

          Another option is that it is a holographic will.  A common issue with holographs is whether the testator had testamentary intent.  It seems likely that Ted intended the form to be his will (here we use the ordinary preponderance standard, rather than clear and convincing).  California law allows us to consider printed parts of the will on this issue, and there's no doubt that it looks like a will (see the words "Last will and testament").  It seems he had testamentary intent.

          Also, the signature and material provisions must be in Ted's handwriting.  He signed it.  Unlike testamentary intent, deciding whether there is a material provision must be done without reference to the printed parts.  Here, the handwritten parts are Ted Smith...the International Society of Hare Krishnas....23rd June 2001.  Without the printed part, this makes no sense and there is no material provision in Ted's handwriting.  For this reason, it would probably not be considered a valid holographic will.

          The best hope for the Hare Krishnas is the letter that Ted sent to Sara.  It seems to contain a holographic codicil, which is dated after Ted tried to execute the form will.  If it is a valid codicil, it would republish the form will and make it valid (see the case where the testator gave $10 to his brother at the bottom of a typed will). 

          I will discuss in question 3 whether the P.S. in the letter is a valid will.  If so, we need to decide if it's a codicil, or amendment, to the printed form will.  This depends on whether Ted intended the P.S. to be a completely new will, replacing the form will, or to be an amendment to it.  Because the P.S. only disposes of a watch, it is unlikely that Ted intended it to replace the printed form will.  And the letter was sent about a week after he signed the form, which means he almost certainly saw the gift of the watch as amending (not replacing) the gift of his entire estate to the Hare Krishnas.  Thus, assuming the P.S. constitutes a valid holographic will (see question 3), it most likely republished the printed will form and in so doing made it a valid part of Ted's testamentary plan.

3.       Sara will get the watch only if the P.S. in the letter was a valid will.  It was not a valid attested will (see requirements above) because it was not witnessed.  Like the printed form, it does not substantially comply with the required formalities for an attested will. 

          Could it be a holographic will?  Ted seems to have had testamentary intent because he talks about dying and mentions that he inherited the watch, which shows he was thinking of disposing of property at death.  The use of "want" might suggest that it is merely precatory (expressing a desire), but I think he had testamentary intent.  As to signature, as long as he normally signed letters to Sara as "Uncle Ted," it qualifies.  And giving something away is a material provision, so all the requirements for a holographic will are met.

          Thus, Sara gets the watch.  Since the P.S. is a codicil that republishes the printed form will, the printed form will is now also valid and the Hare Krishnas get the remainder of his estate (to the extent that Ted was entitled to dispose of it by will--see answer to question 1).