My brother in law feels he is entitled to more than a one half share and that he should get first pick of all assets. He feels this way because he lived next door to my mother in law for 14 years and took care of all of her yard and home maintenance. My husband's problem with this is that his brother lived rent free for the 14 years he was taking care of his mother's yard and house. My husband's mother told my husband this years ago and asked if he had a problem with it. My husband said no, that he thought the situation was fair. My husband now feels his brother has already been compensated for the services he provided and that the estate should be split equally as the will indicates. Further, my husband did provide his mother with different types of assistance, just not yard and home maintenance. What do you think?
What would your BIL have paid in rent for all those years? But then how much daily help did he provide, on call and 24/7? Was your MIL sick before she passed? Did BIL take care of a sick and/or cognitively impaired person for some of those years? The "value" of caregiving of a LO is often something that cannot be quantified.
Also, did your BIL give up things in order to caregive your MIL? Did he work less, retire early? Did it impact his social life or mental health?
I'm not taking a side, but just want to point out that if you and your husband weren't doing the daily hands-on caregiving there is a LOT you don't know about what it fully entails.
Your MIL might have written her Will before the bulk of the caregiving took place.
And tell BIL you know he lived rent free in exchange for the things he did.
There is an executor of the will.
Anyone's "feelings" don't, at this point, matter.
Surely it is clear to any and all in this situation that the one brother, simply virtue of living next door, got THE BRUNT of the care more than just in getting out a lawn mower. He will have been responsible for likely daily calls. Lights are out. Sink is clogged. Blah blah.
BUT he should, if he expected compensation, have taken it at that time by some care contract for monthly maintenance, whatever. He can't do it now. He can contest the will, but that will simply eat up the assets of the estate. Up to him.
Now, here you are.
There is a will.
There is an executor of the will who is responsible to settle the estate per the dictates of the will.
And that is that.
Issue is over and done with.
If brother number two, who DIDN'T do it all-- who didn't save 1,000s of dollars of this estate by being cook and bottle washer as well as the transportation and shoulder to weep upon--if that brother who skated free wishes to give some more of the estate to brother who DID DO ALL OF THAT STUFF? He should do so, and good on him.
This is entirely an issue of LEGAL versus EMOTIONAL. The two don't play well together.