Personal Property Memorandum Requirements in Kentucky

At a glance

Kentucky uses fixed incorporation

Kentucky's current Chapter 394 contains no special statute for a separate, freely updatable tangible-personal-property list. Kentucky decisions instead recognize a narrower common-law incorporation-by-reference route.

In Stouse v. First National Bank of Chicago, the court upheld incorporation of an “existing, well-identified document.” The trust instrument there was executed immediately before the will on the same day, and the will identified it by its date, settlor, trustees, and terms. The writing therefore must exist when the will is executed, and the valid will must identify the writing.

Tuttle v. Berryman states the identification rule directly:

“It must be clearly and certainly identified.”

The court explained that a properly attested and probated will can establish the referenced paper as part of the will. But it rejected the memoranda in that case because they did not correspond to the deeds that the will said had been made. A general reference cannot be repaired by testimony that substitutes a different kind of paper after death.

Because this is a general incorporation doctrine rather than a memorandum statute, Chapter 394 states no special tangible-property definition, asset-exclusion list, value ceiling, handwriting condition, date condition, or item-and-recipient formula for the separate paper. Section 394.040 still governs the incorporating will: it must be written and subscribed as that section requires, with two subscribing witnesses when the will is not wholly written by the testator.

What trips people up

The incorporated writing is fixed at will execution. Stouse held that later amendments executed with will formalities could be upheld, but that informal amendments must be disregarded while the original incorporated terms remain in effect. A person therefore cannot revise the list casually after signing the will and expect the old reference to make the revision binding.

KRS § 394.080 reinforces the formal route. It permits revocation of a will or codicil by a later will or codicil, by another writing executed in the manner required for a will, or by one of the physical acts stated in the section with revocatory intent. A binding later change to incorporated testamentary terms must use the applicable will-formal route rather than an informal list update.

Common questions

Must the separate writing be signed, witnessed, handwritten, or dated?

Kentucky has no memorandum statute imposing those separate conditions. Tuttle discusses even an unexecuted referenced paper, but requires the will itself to identify the paper clearly and certainly. The incorporating will must independently satisfy KRS § 394.040.

Can the writing be prepared after the will?

Not through the incorporation route described in Stouse. The incorporated document must already exist when the will is executed. A document executed immediately before the will on the same day can satisfy that timing rule.

What happens if a later informal revision conflicts with the original?

Stouse says the informal amendment is disregarded and the original incorporated document is given effect. A later amendment may be binding if it is executed with the formalities required for a will.

How is the writing used in probate?

When the identification and timing requirements are met, Tuttle treats the paper as part of the probated will. KRS § 394.130 states that no will may be received in evidence until a District Court allows it and admits it to record. Chapter 394 states no separate memorandum filing or delivery procedure.

Statutes and sources

• KRS Chapter 394 — complete current wills chapter index, including the electronic-wills provisions effective July 15, 2026, but no separate-writing or personal-property-memorandum section. Kentucky Legislative Research Commission: https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/chapter.aspx?id=39195 (accessed 2026-08-11).
• KRS § 394.040 — written-will subscription and witness requirements. Kentucky Legislative Research Commission: https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statute.aspx?id=36237 (accessed 2026-08-11).
• KRS § 394.080 — permitted methods for revoking a will or codicil. Kentucky Legislative Research Commission: https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statute.aspx?id=36244 (accessed 2026-08-11).
• KRS § 394.130 — probate before a will may be received in evidence. Kentucky Legislative Research Commission: https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statute.aspx?id=36251 (accessed 2026-08-11).
• Stouse v. First National Bank of Chicago, 245 S.W.2d 914 (Ky. 1951) — existing, well-identified document and treatment of later formal and informal amendments. https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1507832/ (accessed 2026-08-11).
• Tuttle v. Berryman, 94 Ky. 553, 23 S.W. 345 (1893) — clear-and-certain identification, mismatch failure, and probate effect. https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/7220758/ (accessed 2026-08-11).