Who Should Inherit Lord Moulton’s Estate?
(Adapted by M. Sherk from “Heirs” by P. Ur, Discussions that Work. Cambridge University Press, 1989.)
Lord Moulton, a very rich old man, has died without leaving a will to say who should inherit his
valuable estate which includes investments, bank accounts worth several million pounds, and Moulton
Manor, a large country home with extensive grounds near a medium-size town. Since Moulton did not
leave a will, a court jury must decide who should get the estate. The estate must not be divided and
the court cannot control how the money is used once it is inherited.
There are five claimants hoping to inherit the estate: Lady Searle, Miss Langland, Tim Brodie, Jane
Smith, and the local orphanage (represented by Mr. Webster). Below is information about each claim.
When you read these, distinguish carefully between what is known to be true and what the claimant
says is true. What is stated below as fact is true, but what the claimants say may be false. Of course, if
a claimant is caught lying to the court then it is likely that he or she will not inherit anything.
Each claimant will take the stand, testify, and answer questions. For each claimant, there will also be
one witness that can give further information. The claimant’s team can decide who the witness is and
what he/she should say. The testimonies of claimants and witnesses will reveal information that is not
mentioned below, but should not contradict the statements below. (If anybody contradicts what we
know is factual in this introduction or in the statements below, then we know that person is lying.)
Claimants and witnesses might be lying or mistaken; what they say is not necessarily true. Lawyers
are expected to try to find holes in the testimony of other claimants and witnesses.
Lady Searle: She was married to Moulton’s younger brother John for five years. Unknown to others
in the family, John was an abusive alcoholic and frequently beat her. She fell in love with another
man, Lord Searle. When she announced that she planned to divorce John, he was broken-hearted and
committed suicide so the divorce was never finalized. As a widow, she soon married Lord Searle,
thereby becoming Lady Searle. Two years later Lord Searle lost almost all of his money in a bad
business deal and committed suicide. Lady Searle has not remarried since. Five years ago, Lord
Moulton found out about how John had abused Lady Searle and visited her to apologize that his
brother would do such a terrible thing. A bitter old woman, Lady Searle refused to accept his apology.
Around that time, Lord Moulton started to refer to Lady Searle as “John’s widow” or “my sister-inlaw”. Moulton frequently sends her small gifts and some money, but she always sends them back.
Lady Searle, now 70 years old, lives alone in a small village 200km from Moulton Manor, in
comfortable but not luxurious circumstances. She had no children with either of her husbands. The
money would enable her to hire a nurse (she is often ill), to travel, and to move into pleasanter
surroundings. She has no immediate family and is not very popular in her neighborhood.
Nurse Langland: She is the nurse who attended Lord Moulton since a serious accident six years ago
which left him unable to take care of himself. She is single, 48 years old, loves her work, and is
professionally very able. Lord Moulton paid her very well; in fact, her salary was twice as much as
other nurses in similar positions. An affectionate and loyal attendant, she undoubtedly eased Lord
Moulton’s latter years. Lord Moulton trusted her and liked her but always called her “Miss Langland”
or “nurse”, never using her first name. Miss Langland lived at Moulton Manor, on-call 24 hours a day.
In her first five years at Moulton Manor she actually spent only a few hours per day attending to Lord
Moulton’s health needs but in the last year of Moulton’s life she was at his side almost constantly.
Although physically weak, Moulton’s mind was sharp right up until his death and he conducted his
own business affairs. Since he tended to talk to himself as he worked and since she was always with
him, Langland became very familiar with the way he thought and managed his finances. Sometimes
Moulton would ask her what she thought he would do in a given situation. Her answers were so
accurate that Moulton sometimes joked with his doctor that “She knows my mind better than I do,
except that she thinks I give Tim and the orphanage too much money!”
Tim Brodie: A handsome, popular, 19-year-old, Tim drives a motorcycle much too fast, has lots of
girlfriends, and is not very honest. He is the 19-year-old son of Lord Moulton’s gardener, Bill Brodie,
who was killed in an accident 10 years ago while working on the manor grounds. Bill had asked
Moulton to buy a new ladder to replace an old one but Moulton had refused, thinking the old ladder
was fine. Unfortunately, the ladder broke the next week while Bill was on it, and he was killed. Lord
Moulton felt quite guilty about Bill’s death and since the accident Tim and his mother have been
living rent-free in the gardener’s cottage on the manor grounds even though a new gardener was hired.
Moulton liked Tim, paid for his education at expensive private schools, and took a constant interest in
his welfare. Tim has visited Moulton almost every day when he was not away at school. Up until the
last year before his death, when he was bedridden, Moulton would often take Tim with him to bet on
horses at the racetrack. Tim says that Lord Moulton often asked him to talk about his wild adventures
and laughed saying “Son, you sound just like me when I was a young man!” Now that he has finished
high school, Tim, who has a flair for languages, desperately wants to study at university abroad, but
unfortunately he has no money so will have to get a job and save if he can.
Jane Smith: She is a penniless, unmarried woman about 25 years old, with a small baby. She has
recently appeared on the scene claiming to be Lord Moulton’s daughter. She has a letter which
appears to be in Lord Moulton’s writing and signed by him, addressed to her mother admitting
paternity and proposing marriage. Hand-writing experts disagree about whether the handwriting is
Lord Moulton’s; some say yes, some say no. Jane’s mother Susan never married. To make a living,
she ran a store in a building owned by Lord Moulton. About 25 years ago, the store ran into financial
difficulties so Susan visited Lord Moulton and begged him for help. He responded by giving the store
free rent for six months and visiting frequently to check on its progress. By the end of the six months,
the store had recovered and it went on to become very successful but Moulton apparently never
visited it again. A few months ago Jane’s mother died. Jane says that she found the letter when
looking through her mother’s possessions recently and decided to visit her father, only to discover he
had just passed away. Jane seems very reluctant to give any further details of her past life, refuses to
allow DNA testing, and has no references. She does have a genuine, 25-year-old newspaper clipping,
which she says she found in her mother’s records, in which Lord Moulton admits that he has had
many affairs, but no women’s names are mentioned in the article.
The Local Orphanage: The orphanage is a charity which receives no help from the government,
though new legislation might change this next year. The orphanage was founded by Lord Moulton’s
parents, who were very eager to contribute to the community in the area of Moulton Manor. Everyone
in the area knows that they had the following engraved on the cornerstone of the main orphanage
building: “The Moulton family will never let this orphanage fail.” They gave generous financial
support to the orphanage and Lord Moulton continued that practice, giving a sizable donation to the
orphanage each year, accounting for about 50% of the orphanage’s income. Mr. Webster, the director
of the orphanage, is a 65-year-old man who is greatly respected in the community and is known for
both his honesty and his love of children. Five years ago he sold his small local store for an amount
that would let him retire in comfort. Soon afterward, however, the orphanage needed a new director
and Mr. Webster volunteered for the job for a salary of $1 per year. Unfortunately, Webster is not a
good enough manager to handle such a large concern as the orphanage and there are rumors that much
of the money donated to the orphanage is finding its way into the pockets of the orphanage staff rather
than being used for the orphans.
As you prepare, think of arguments for and against each of these claimants.
What sort of evidence would you guess the claimant would want from a witness to his/her case? Any
evidence that is “too perfect” will sound fake. For instance, if Tim Brodie claims he was “secretly
adopted” and produces an adoption certificate, an opposing lawyer will (rightly) point out that if the
certificate were genuine, a copy would almost certainly have been found in Lord Moulton’s records.
Murray will be the judge and will keep track of time. The time limits below are somewhat flexible at
Murray’s discretion.
Procedure for Day 1:
1. [15-30 minutes total] Opening Statements by each Lawyer 1:
a. 3 to 5 minutes each. (approximately 1 minute of thinking time after each)
b. Speaking to the jury, summarize the case for your client. You do not have to review
all the information in the handout sheets – assume they know all that.
c. Tell the jury the main reason why your client should inherit the estate and how you
are going to prove your claim is the best.
[10 minutes] Team discussion time
2. [Approximately 50 minutes total] Each witness takes the stand:
a. Direct examination: Prompted by the client’s Lawyer 2, the client’s witness testifies.
The lawyer should use the witness’s testimony to building the case for the client.
b. Lawyer 2 from another client cross-examines this witness [3-5 minutes].
c. If the total time for (a) and (b) is significantly less than 10 minutes, Judge Murray
may allow another lawyer to cross-examine.
[10 minutes] Team discussion time
Procedure for Day 2:
3. [Approximately 50 minutes total] Each client takes the stand:
a. Direct examination: Prompted by the client’s Lawyer 1, the client testifies. The
lawyer uses the testimony to build the case. [3-5 minutes]
b. Another client’s Lawyer 1 cross-examines this client [3-5 minutes]
c. If the total time for (a) and (b) is significantly less than 10 minutes, Judge Murray
may allow another lawyer to cross-examine.
[10 minutes] Team discussion time
4. [15-30 minutes total] Each Lawyer 2 gives a closing statement.
a. 3-5 minutes each. (approximately 1 minute of thinking time after each)
b. Speaking to the jury, summarize why your client’s claim is better than the other
claims. You may mention positive evidence for your claimant and negative evidence
for the other claimants.
5. [10-15 minutes] Questions from the Jury:
a. Any jury member may ask any claimant for further information. The question may be
answered by the claimant or any of the lawyers.
6. The jury deliberates and come back with a decision on who will inherit the estate.
To prepare, each legal team (claimant, lawyers, and witness) should:
 work on an opening statement giving reasons why he/she should inherit the estate instead of the
other claimants. This is, in effect, your version of what Moulton would have written as a will.
 predict questions that the court or other claimants may ask and prepare good answers
 prepare questions you wish to ask the other claimants
 decide who the witness will be and what he/she will say
 plan your closing statement. This will depend on the other claims also, but mostly on yours.
•
Remember that to argue your case well, you need to support your own case and refute
the other cases. You will have to defend your own claim and attack the other claims.
As a team, you will have to decide how much time to spend on the positive (building
your own case) and how much on the negative (tearing down your opponents’ cases).
Other Information
Assume that the order in which the claimant teams will speak and present evidence has
been fairly determined and will stay the same for each stage (opening statement, witness
testimony, claimant testimony, closing statement). The order is:
Searle, Langland, Brodie, Smith, Webster
Each legal team must, of course, find good reasons to support its own claim and ways to
defend its claim against attacks. Why is your claim strong? Why does it fit the legal basis for
judgement? What are the weaknesses of your claim? If you were an opposing lawyer, how
would you attack the claim? How will you defend against such attacks?
Each team must also guess how the other legal teams will try to establish their claims. You
may guess wrong, but it will help to be prepared for something rather than nothing. What
are the strengths and weaknesses of the other claims as you read them on the information
sheets? How will the other teams try to defend against attacks on their claim? You do not
know what the other teams’ witnesses will say to add to their cases, so you will have to
“think on your feet” to cross-examine them. Much of your planning here will be of the form:
“If they say ___________, then we can ask them _________.”
Although each legal team should prepare to critique all of the other claims (e.g. in the
closing statements), it should focus particularly on the cases it will be attacking by crossexamination since each person testifying will be cross-examined by only one team.
Searle team: will cross-examine Brodie witness and Smith
Langland team: will cross-examine Smith witness and Webster
Brodie team: will cross-examine Webster witness and Searle
Smith team: will cross-examine Searle witness and Langland
Webster team: will cross-examine Langland witness and Brodie
Useful Sentence Patterns:
 Do you really believe ________________?
 If that were true, then wouldn’t _____________?
 Do you have any doubts about _______________?
 Please tell us in your own words what you ________. (saw that night / heard / read
in that document / ...)
Politeness in using names:
Lord Moulton can be called “Lord Moulton” or “Moulton”. You should not call somebody
just by their surname to their face, but when talking about them it is fine. To
emphasize respect we sometimes include the title even if they are not present when
we speak. “Nixon was a bad president.” “Queen Elizabeth is greatly respected.”
Lady Searle should be called “Lady Searle”. “Mrs. Searle” is correct but disrespects nobility.
Nurse Langland should be called “Ms. Langland” (pronounced “mizz”) or “Nurse Langland”.
Tim Brodie should be called “Mr. Brodie”. Using first name only is OK for children <13.
Jane Smith should be called “Ms. Smith” or “Miss Smith” (less desirable but OK).
Mr. Webster should be called “Mr. Webster” or maybe “Director Webster”.