165: When ‘I Wish’ Isn’t Enough: Precatory Clauses and the Mangione Family Estate

If you’ve been following the news lately, chances are you’ve heard of Luigi Mangione, the man at the center of recent headlines for allegedly shooting UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson. While the criminal case has drawn widespread attention, what caught our interest is a surprising detail about Mangione’s personal life: he’s reportedly listed as a beneficiary in his wealthy grandmother’s estate. Even more intriguing, the will allegedly includes a precatory clause—or “wish language”—suggesting that beneficiaries charged with a felony could forfeit their inheritance.

In this episode of Absolute Trust Counsel, host Kirsten Howe and attorneys Jessica Colbert and Ariana Flynn dive into the concept of precatory clauses, their potential legal implications, and what this could mean for Mangione. Don’t miss this fascinating discussion!

Time-stamped Show Notes:

0:00 Introduction

1:40 Unpacking Luigi Mangione’s Inheritance: Discover how Luigi Mangione’s grandmother’s estate entered the spotlight and why estate planners like us find it so intriguing.

2:25 Has anyone actually seen a copy of the will? We reveal what sources are saying and why there’s still plenty of missing information.

3:38 A term every estate planner (and beneficiary) should know is Precatory Language. We break down what it means and how it can affect your inheritance.

4:50 If you rely on non-binding language in your will, you could invite costly disputes among your heirs. Next, we explain how to avoid this pitfall.

6:48 With limited information available, we still offer insights into what might happen next with Luigi’s share—and how you can protect your own estate from similar issues.

7:22 Thanks for joining us on this deep dive into estate planning and real-life drama. We hope you enjoyed it and picked up tips for your own estate plan. Stay tuned for our next episode!

Transcript:

Hello and welcome to Absolute Trust Talk, our podcast at Absolute Trust Counsel. I’m Kirsten Howe, the managing attorney. Our two associate attorneys, Jessica Colbert and Ariana Flynn, are here.

Today, we’re going to do what I think is one of our favorite things to do, which is a little bit of, I’m going to say, celebrity gossip—although I hesitate to use the word “celebrity”—and we’re going to tie it to a little bit of education. The person we are talking about when I use the word “celebrity” is the man of the last three or four weeks, Luigi Mangione. You all have heard of him. He’s the person who allegedly shot the CEO of United Healthcare, Brian Thompson. Then there was a big manhunt, and they finally captured him.

We know many things about Luigi—little facts drip out here and there. He graduated from an Ivy League college. He comes from a very wealthy family in Baltimore. Ariana dug up recently that he was named a beneficiary in his very wealthy grandmother’s will. Of course, it’s interesting to us because we’re estate planners, and anything about a celebrity’s estate plan is interesting. We will talk about it a little because something must be learned.

Jessica, tell us a little bit about this supposed will.

Yes, the grandmother, Mary, died in 2023. She was the matriarch of a large family. She had 10 children and 37 grandchildren, including Luigi. She was a Baltimore-area millionaire. We haven’t actually seen a copy of this will or trust, but it allegedly says that the grandchildren and children could inherit as long as they had not been charged, indicted, convicted, or pled guilty to a felony, which is possibly problematic for our friend.

But Jessica, you said we haven’t seen a copy of a will or trust. Ariana, what do you know about this?

Allegedly, from what we —hypothetically speaking— do have is language from this alleged will that expresses Mary’s intent and her wish. Whenever you see the words “wish” or “I hope,” that kind of leads to this legal term called precatory language in a will, which is different from an express term, which is legally binding.

Right, and I just want to be really clear that we’re just repeating what Fox News has been saying. We haven’t seen the will; we don’t know. As far as we’ve been able to tell, or at least I’ve been able to tell, nobody else has come forward and said, “Oh, yeah, I have a copy of it too.” In California, we would be able to find that if we went to the courthouse and requested it, but we don’t know. This is Baltimore, so Maryland—we don’t know what their practice is.

Back to the terminology in question: You use the word precatory, which is not a word that anybody other than estate lawyers ever uses. It’s a real word; it’s not made up.

Precatory is basically just a wish that the person drafting the will puts in their plan. It’s not legally binding, but it does express the intent. The settlor or executor doesn’t really have to follow that, but it’s just a good way of expressing the settlor’s intent. Because it’s not legally binding, we want to make sure that if a settlor does want to include language, it’s enforceable— that they include a language in a way that can be enforced legally. This is good practice for us, other estate planners, and other clients who do have “wishes” to make sure they avoid precatory language if they really do want to enforce something.

Are there any ideas or ways to avoid or enforce a client’s wealth and values?

This is one where there’s the use of a disqualifying clause. Here, the grandmother was saying that a beneficiary would be disqualified if they had committed a felony or that it was her wish that this was the case. When using these sorts of clauses, the provision could have been much clearer if the intent was truly that the beneficiary be excluded. It could have just said: “A beneficiary who has been charged, indicted, or pled guilty to a felony is excluded.” That way, it would be enforceable.

It’s kind of funny if she said it as a “wish” or “hope,” she used precatory language; you know why. That could be easily made clear and simple for the trustee to implement. If you muddy it up by saying, “It’s my wish,” I don’t know. To me, that invites litigation, I would think. Or it opens up the door to it.

What do you think, Ariana?

Exactly. You take something that could be an enforceable clause and muddy up the water with the word “wish.” Even if it’s just one word, it could absolutely change the effectiveness of that sentence.

By not expressly giving the trustee the authority to do the thing that you wish they would do, you put the trustee in a tough spot. Either way, if they exercise it and shut somebody who did something bad out, that person will be mad, and if they don’t, all the other beneficiaries will be mad. It’s just not a good situation. I wouldn’t take that job as a trustee.

With this many beneficiaries, if this will is legitimate and we can get a copy of it, I can see some tension in the near future. This is not on the topic of precatory language, but the more beneficiaries we have, the more likely there is to be disagreement that rises to the level of litigation.

We’ll have to wait and see if we can get a copy of that will and have something further to say about it in the future.

I hope you learned a little bit and maybe enjoyed yourself a little bit. Thank you for going with us down that little gossip rabbit hole; we look forward to connecting with you next time.

Resources Related to This Episode:

Brian ThompsonCriminal CasesFamily WealthFelony ChargesHigh-Profile CasesLegal LoopholesLuigi MangionePodcastsPrecatory ClauseUnitedHealthcareWish Language
Kirsten Howe:
Related Post
  1. 164: Shielding Your Legacy: How to Avoid Estate Litigation Pitfalls
  2. 163: Courthouse Confessions: Inside Trust and Estate Litigation