Furthermore, no other state of which we are aware, has applied Trimble v. Gordon, in a succession case, from a point later than Trimble's rendition date. Ford v. King, 268 Ark. 128, 594 S.W.2d 227 (1980); Stewart v. Smith, 269 Ark. 363, 601 S.W. 837 (1980); Frakes v. Hunt, 266 Ark. 171, 583 S.W.2d 497 (1979); In Re Rudder's Estate, 78 Ill. App.3d 517, 34 Ill.Dec. 100, 397 N.E.2d 556 (1979); Pendleton v. Pendleton, 560 S.W.2d 538 (Ky. 1977); Murray v. Murray, 564 S.W.2d 5 (Ky. 1978); Matter of Sharp's Estate, 151 N.J. Super. 579, 377 A.2d 730 (1977); Allen v. Harvey, 568 S.W.2d 829 (Tenn. 1978); Winn v. Lackey, 618 S.W.2d 910 (Tex.Civ.App. 1981). Therefore, even were we not to find the date of the 1974 Louisiana Constitution controlling, a retroactive application of Brown back to the date Trimble v. Gordon was rendered, would be necessary.
See also Teacher v. Kijurina (1950), 365 Pa. 480, 76 A.2d 197 (Language of the deed, to "Nick Kijurina and Sarah, his wife," was insufficient to create a survivorship estate.); Smith v. Stewart (App. 1980) 268 Ark. 766, 596 S.W.2d 346, 9 A.L.R.4th 1185, aff'd 269 Ark. 363, 601 S.W.2d 837 (Deeds to "Wesley Shaw and Dixie Shaw, his wife" were insufficient to satisfy statutory requirement of an expressed declaration of a joint tenancy with the right of survivorship.)
On September 26, 1977, the alleged illegitimate child of the intestate filed suit urging that she was the sole heir of the intestate and under Trimble she inherited the intestate's real property. The Supreme Court of Arkansas held, "to prevent chaotic conditions arising from the lack of title to real property," that Trimble would not be applied retroactively where the intestate father died before Trimble, and suit was not filed until after April 26, 1977, the date the United States Supreme Court decided Trimble. The Supreme Court of Arkansas has held that in cases pending on April 26, 1977, the Trimble rule applies. Lucas v. Handcock, 583 S.W.2d 491 (Ark.Sup. 19379); Stewart v. Smith, 601 S.W.2d 837 (Ark.Sup. 19380). The Supreme Court of Kentucky in Pendleton v. Pendleton, 560 S.W.2d 538 (Ky.Sup. 19377) held:
However, in applying Trimble v Gordon ( supra), to their statutes that were similar, most State courts have declined to apply it retroactively, applying it only to estates where the decedent died after April 26, 1977, the date of the Supreme Court's decision in Trimble v Gordon, or to matters that were pending on the date of that decision where the decedent had died prior to it. (See Matter of Sharp, 151 N.J. Super. 579; Pendleton v Pendleton, 560 S.W.2d 538 [Ky]; Jones v Davis, 616 S.W.2d 276 [Tex]; Matter of Brown, 388 So.2d 1151 [La]; Stewart v Smith, 269 Ark. 363.) The reason for limiting the retroactivity of the ruling in Trimble ( supra) is the chaotic effect complete retroactivity would have on the State's interest "[in a] just and orderly disposition of property at death" ( Lalli v Lalli, 439 U.S. 259, 268, supra).