The enforcement of an in terrorem clause must comply with the terms of the Will

he beneficiary of her grandmothers estate argued that the trial court erred by finding that her actions invoked the in terrorem, or no contest, provision of her grandmother's will. The appellate court held that the trial court erred in concluding that the beneficiaries actions violated the in terrorem clause in the will. The in terrorem clause in the grandmothers will was not limited to will contests but also forbad challenges to a specific provision in her will giving the executor the option to purchase the real property in the estate and a bequest to the beneficiary of tangible personal property. It forbade challenges to the validity of the distribution provision by filing objections or complaints with the probate court. The beneficiary filed pleadings related to the timing and manner in which the executor exercised his option to purchase the estates real property. However, the beneficiaries request that the trial court determine whether the timing of and manner in which the executor exercised the option to purchase complied with the provisions of the will sought clarification or construction of the will's provisions. Thus, the trial court erred in concluding that, by her actions, the beneficiary sought to challenge "the validity of" the will or to prohibit the executor from exercising his right under the will to purchase the grandmothers farmland. Rather, the beneficiary sought only to ensure that the executors actions complied with the grandmothers directions and the trial courts decision was reversed.