Would the following clause be enforced: “in event my son H is still married to a person who is not Jewish at my death, he shall forfeit his share”?

• A. Yes, the clause is enforceable as a partial restraint on marriage.
• B. No, the clause is void as it tends to disrupt a family relationship (public policy).
• C. It depends on the jurisdiction, but generally enforceable.
• D. Only if both spouses consent.

Answer: (B)

A restraint on marriage in an estate plan is generally void because it interferes with a person’s fundamental right to marry and with family relationships. When a provision conditions inheritance on the beneficiary’s future marriage choices—such as requiring the heir to marry only someone of a certain religion or punishing them if they marry someone outside that group—it acts as a punitive rule that vests in the testator the power to control a beneficiary’s personal life. Courts view this as an improper intrusion into private life and, more broadly, as contrary to public policy. Because of that policy, the clause would not be enforceable, and the inheritance would typically pass free of that condition. In many cases, if the rest of the will contains severable language, the court may strike only the offending restraint and enforce the remaining provisions, but the specific marriage-based forfeiture itself would not stand.