Talk:Laughing heir

- Mention workaround? - The (seemingly but not to everyone) obvious workaround to these restrictions is to manually specify a specific relative since technically everyone is a relative. Should this be in the article?71.196.246.113 (talk) 07:46, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There comes a point where it is not reasonably feasible to determine who a person's next closest living relation is. In a sense, if no such heir can be pinned down, the estate does go to "everyone", since it escheats to the state. bd2412 T 16:19, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article Misstates Definition of Laughing Heir Statutes

The article has gotten the definition of a laughing heir statute completely backwards. When it states in the header that "a laughing heir statute ... cuts off the right of inheritance when the remaining relatives become too remote" this is incorrect. A laughing heir statute specifically allows for the creation of a laughing heir. See e.g. Virginia's laughing heir statute, § 64.2-200, which states in part "And so on, in other cases, without end, passing to the nearest lineal ancestors, and the descendants of such ancestors."

It also later states Virginia does not have a Laughing Heir Statute, which of course is wrong, Virginia has had an LHS since the 50s. Should this article be reworked? HuskyCriminologist (talk) 18:54, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]