I believe verbal instructions would be acceptable. I’m not sure if each yoresh needs to be instructed. For practical reasons, you’d never create an estate plan that relied on verbal instructions or on halachic principles that are not aligned with secular law.

What does, “the directions are given to the halachic yoresh” mean? Does this mean verbally? What if there is more than one yoresh?

In terms of Halacha, there are several issues. First, although there is an important minority opinion that a will is an effective transfer document, this is obviously not the case where a will was discussed but never executed.

“Mitzvah lekayem divrei hamet” can sometimes play a role. There are different opinions as to when the doctrine applies, but in general, a decedent’s express directions are binding only if he or she transfers the subject property to a third party with such directions, or if the directions are given to the halachic yoresh. Neither seem applicable here. It appears from the question that no one but the lawyer knew the decedent’s intentions. If so, the decedent never gave specific instructions during his/her lifetime to a third party in possession or to his or her halachic heirs.

Kibud av may play a role, but there are limitations, and the obligation, even where it applies, is usually not enforceable.

I would say, however, that there are many forms of both capitalism and socialism, and many combinations of them as well, yet they’re each treated as if monolithic.

What about a Scandinavian social democracy model (i.e., private property, strong unions, high taxation, strong welfare state, universal healthcare, free education, etc.)? Is that what you think the Torah and Talmud is prescribing?