What the Worthier Title Doctrine Was
Under the old common law worthier title doctrine, if a person created a trust or other instrument that named their own heirs as beneficiaries, courts could treat the gift as though it never happened. Instead, they would presume the property reverted to the person who created the instrument. The reasoning was that an heir should receive property through inheritance rather than through a separate gift.
That rule created confusion. Estate planning documents often use broad language like "to my heirs" or "to my next of kin" as a shorthand. Under the worthier title doctrine, that language could be interpreted to mean the creator kept an interest in the property, even when the intent was clearly to pass it along.
The common law doctrine of worthier title is not recognized in this state. Therefore, language in a governing instrument that describes the beneficiaries of a disposition as the transferor's heirs, heirs at law, next of kin, distributees, relatives, or family, or by similar language, does not create or presumptively create a reversionary interest in the transferor.
A.R.S. § 14-2710What This Means for Your Estate Plan
Arizona's rejection of this doctrine is good news for anyone with a trust or will. It means the words in your documents will be read at face value. If your trust says property passes to your heirs, the court will identify those heirs using Arizona's intestacy rules and distribute accordingly. There is no risk of a court deciding that you secretly meant to keep the property for yourself.
This matters most in trust planning. Many trusts include remainder provisions that distribute assets "to the trustor's heirs" after the primary beneficiaries have been taken care of. In states that still follow the worthier title doctrine, those provisions can be challenged. In Arizona, they stand as written.
