When investigators entered the home of legendary actor Gene Hackman and his wife, Betsy Machiko Arakawa, in a gated community outside Santa Fe, New Mexico, on February 26, 2025, they found the couple dead under mysterious circumstances.
Following their investigation, authorities pieced together a timeline of the couple’s last days, indicating that a period of about a week had passed between each of their deaths. The timing of their deaths matters not only for the criminal investigation but also for estate planning purposes, due to New Mexico’s simultaneous death rule. This rule can impact inheritance rights when spouses die close in time to each other and their estate plans do not address this scenario.
New Mexico’s Simultaneous Death Law
New Mexico’s simultaneous death law is a somewhat obscure estate law that could affect the distribution of Hackman’s and Arakawa’s estates.
Simultaneous death laws, such as the Uniform Simultaneous Death Act (USDA), enacted in 1940 and updated in 1993, were created to resolve legal uncertainties when two or more people die at the same time or close in time to each other and the order of death is unclear.
Before such laws, when two people—usually spouses—died at roughly the same time, the lack of clear evidence about who died first could lead to legal battles and inconsistent inheritance outcomes. Courts sometimes resorted to presumptions based on factors such as age or health that were arbitrary and unreliable, and assets could pass through one estate and then immediately to the next, resulting in unintended beneficiaries or excessive taxation.
The USDA created a more standardized approach and introduced a simpler standard: if two people die within 120 hours (5 days) of each other, they are treated as both dying before each other. That way, their assets pass to the next-in-line beneficiaries—not to each other—and avoid double probate.
Most states have adopted some version of the USDA. New Mexico’s version uses the 120-hour rule and presumes simultaneous death unless clear evidence proves otherwise.[1]
Variations exist across states, including slightly different timeframes, the standards of evidence needed to prove the order of death (and override the simultaneous death presumption), and how the law applies to specific property types. The law is only a default, meaning that it may not come into play if a will, trust, or other contractual agreement, such as an insurance policy, explicitly addresses simultaneous death with a survivorship clause that extends the time period beyond 120 hours.
How the Simultaneous Death Act Could Impact the Hackman and Arakawa Estates
Based on comments from the chief medical examiner and the latest details about their deaths, Hackman and Arakawa appear to have died about a week apart—Arakawa likely around February 11 and Hackman around February 18.[2] Assuming authorities accept this timeline, the New Mexico simultaneous death law will not apply because they were deemed to have died more than 120 hours apart. As a result, the distribution of their assets would be subject to their estate plans (if they created them) or estate intestacy laws (if they did not have estate plans). The following is an overview of how assets may be distributed in this case (1) with a valid estate plan extending the state’s default survivorship rule and (2) without an estate plan.
- If Arakawa’s and Hackman’s wills included an extended survivorship provision: Reports indicate that Arakawa had a will leaving everything to Hackman. Also, it is said that her will included a survivorship clause requiring Hackman to outlive her by 90 days to inherit—overriding the standard 120-hour rule under state law. Since Hackman passed away about a week after her, he would legally be considered to have predeceased her under this 90-day survivorship rule. As a result, Arakawa’s contingent beneficiaries—reportedly various charities, as she had no children—would inherit instead of Hackman.
- If they did not proactively plan to extend the survivorship period: Although it is not what happened in this case, it is worth considering how things could have played out if Arakawa and Hackman had not proactively prepared an estate plan and included extended survivorship provisions in their wills. Because Hackman survived Arakawa by more than 120 hours, he would have been considered the survivor under default state law and would have inherited Arakawa’s assets. Those assets would then become part of Hackman’s estate and be distributed according to his own will or, if none existed, under intestacy laws. In that scenario, both Arakawa’s assets and Hackman’s assets would likely pass to Hackman’s beneficiaries—presumably his three children—rather than the charities Arakawa intended to benefit if Hackman predeceased her.
Estate Planning Lessons: Timing and Details Matter
Celebrity deaths serve as a reminder of estate planning principles that may apply to ordinary individuals and situations. The circumstances of the Hackman-Arakawa deaths were unusual, but simultaneous deaths are fairly common. Simultaneous death laws apply beyond rare cases to scenarios such as car accidents, house fires, and natural disasters, and they emphasize estate planning’s universal importance.
Life is unpredictable. Estate plans must account for numerous contingencies, including the possibility of simultaneous or near-simultaneous deaths, especially among spouses or close family members. Default laws like simultaneous death statutes are meant to provide a framework when no specific planning exists. They cannot account for individual intentions or family dynamics.
Survivorship clauses are a dramatic example of how seemingly simple provisions can profoundly impact who ultimately benefits from your estate. By understanding the potential impact of simultaneous death laws and proactively incorporating tools such as survivorship clauses and contingent beneficiaries into your will or trust, you can take control of your legacy, protect your intended beneficiaries, and avoid the unintended consequences that may arise when these crucial considerations are overlooked.
Do not let fate—or the state—decide your estate plan. Make sure you have a will or trust that ensures your assets go where you want, specifies conditions and distribution timing, accounts for state laws, and is updated regularly to account for changing circumstances.
Be prepared for whatever the future holds: contact an attorney and take control of your estate plan.
[1] N.M. Stat. Ann. § 45-2-702 (2024),
https://law.justia.com/codes/new-mexico/chapter-45/article-2/part-7/section-45-2-702/.
[2] Edward Segarra, Gene Hackman’s autopsy reveals no hantavirus infection, which killed wife Betsy, USA Today (Apr. 28, 2025),
https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/celebrities/2025/04/28/gene-hackman-autopsy-hantavirus/83316365007.