postmarital conduct and his right to receive the statutory benefits of marriage." Opinion at 854. As shown above, there is a causal link in this case between Rid-dell's unconscionable conduct-which occurred both before and after the marriage-and his receipt of benefits: Riddell fraudulently induced Lillie to marry him in order to obtain her assets. 24 . AS 13.12.803(a) provides, in relevant part: An individual who feloniously kills the decedent forfeits all benefits ... with respect to the decedent's estate, including an intestate share, an elective share, an omitted spouse's or child's share, a homestead allowance, exempt property, and a family allowance. 25 . Ch. 75, § 3, SLA 1996. 26 . Opinion at 855-856. 27 . See, e.g., In re Estate of Danforth, 705 S.W.2d 609, 611-12 (Mo.App.1986) (<HOLDING>); Garwols v. Bankers' Trust Co., 251 Mich. 420,
holding that the deceased defendant trustees wife was a representative of her husbands estate and a proper party for substitution purposes where the wife was the primary distributee of her deceased husbands estate holding husband could not have marriage annulled because wife was pregnant by him at time of marriage holding that property held by husband and wife in tenancy by entirety cannot be reached by husbands creditors absent fraud holding that the trial court committed manifest error by substituting its judgment for that of a valid and enforceable contractual agreement between the parties when it awarded wife nearly half the value of specific assets acquired during the marriage in disregard of antenuptial agreement calling for husband to take 23 and wife to take 13 of property acquired during the marriage holding that wife not allowed to profit by inheriting from husbands estate when she committed fraud in procuring marriage and conspiracy in murdering husband