Virginia’s Slayer Rule: When Crime Prevents Inheritance

 

This guest post is from Cassidy Eason, Regent Law 3L:

In the world of wills, trusts, and estates, one of the most striking legal principles is the "Slayer Rule." Rooted in equity and public policy, the rule ensures that individuals who intentionally and unlawfully kill another person cannot profit from their wrongdoing. Virginia’s version of the Slayer Rule, codified in Va. Code § 64.2-2500, is a fascinating example of how the law navigates morality and justice in estate distribution.

What Is the Slayer Rule?

The Slayer Rule embodies the principle that "no one should profit from their own wrong." In Virginia, this means that a person who is convicted of—or found to have unlawfully and intentionally killed—another individual is disqualified from inheriting from the victim’s estate. This disqualification applies regardless of the method of inheritance, including under a will, intestacy laws, or even through survivorship in joint tenancy.

Proof Beyond Conviction

Interestingly, the Virginia statute does not require a criminal conviction to invoke the Slayer Rule. Civil courts may determine, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the killing was unlawful and intentional. This lower burden of proof allows the rule to apply even if criminal proceedings are inconclusive or result in an acquittal.

Practical Implications and Policy Considerations

The Slayer Rule exemplifies the law's effort to balance fairness and deterrence. It prevents the moral outrage of a killer benefiting from their crime, while also providing clarity for estate administration. However, the rule also raises questions: Should it apply to manslaughter or killings committed under mitigating circumstances? Should restitution to the victim’s family be prioritized over strict disinheritance?

How Virginia Compares

While most states have some version of the Slayer Rule, there are differences in scope and application. For instance, some jurisdictions allow the rule to apply to cases of voluntary manslaughter, while others impose more stringent requirements for proof. Virginia’s relatively straightforward approach makes it a strong example of clear legislative intent to uphold justice.

The Slayer Rule is more than a legal technicality—it reflects the interplay between law and morality. Virginia’s treatment of this doctrine ensures that justice prevails, even beyond the grave. For anyone drafting estate plans, understanding this rule is essential, as it underscores the importance of naming contingent beneficiaries and considering all possible outcomes.

By understanding the nuances of Virginia’s Slayer Rule, estate planners, legal professionals, and clients can better navigate the complexities of inheritance law while ensuring the law serves its ultimate purpose: justice.