50-State Surveys › Will Revocation and Revival Requirements by State
Will Revocation and Revival Requirements by State
How may a will or codicil be revoked in whole or in part, what intent and proof rules apply, what family-status events revoke provisions, and when can an earlier will or revoked provision be revived?
51 of 51 jurisdictions verified
every entry statute-checked, oldest 2026-08-01
What this survey covers
Making a new will is only one way a prior instrument may be revoked. State law also decides whether an inconsistent codicil revokes only part of a will, whether tearing or canceling the original works, whether another person may perform the act, what happens when an electronic will is deleted, and whether destroying the newer will brings an older one back. This survey compares those rules for ordinary wills and codicils and keeps the revoking act, the required intent, the proof question, family- status changes, and revival in separate columns.
The survey does not decide whether a particular missing or marked-up original was actually revoked. That often turns on possession, intent, testimony, and state proof rules. It also does not substitute omitted-spouse or omitted-child rights for revocation: a later marriage or birth may leave the will in place while a different statute supplies a share outside its terms.
Revoking is the easy part; reviving is where states split
Across all 51 jurisdictions the revocation methods look broadly similar: a later instrument, or a destructive act done with revocatory intent. Revival is where the map fractures, and the finished table sorts the jurisdictions into three rough camps.
About a third follow the Uniform Probate Code's intent-based scheme, in which the answer depends on how the later will was itself revoked. Alaska is the clearest example: destroying a later will that had wholly replaced an earlier one leaves the earlier one revoked unless revival intent is evident, while destroying one that had only partly changed it restores the changed parts unless the contrary is evident. Two defaults, pointing in opposite directions. If the later will was instead revoked by a still-later will, only that document's own terms can show revival intent; statements to family drop out entirely. Alaska Stat. § 13.12.509. North Dakota codifies the identical three-part structure at N.D.C.C. § 30.1-08-09.
A second group declines intent evidence and requires a formal act. Virginia's revoked will, codicil, or provision "shall not be revived unless" reexecuted with the required formalities. Va. Code § 64.2-411. West Virginia, Iowa, Arkansas, Illinois, Kentucky, North Carolina, and Oregon take the same line, permitting only reexecution or a will-formal codicil, and only so far as revival intent is shown. The District of Columbia belongs here and states the point most bluntly: revival is impossible "otherwise than by its re-execution, or by a codicil executed as provided in the case of wills," whatever route was used to revoke.
A third group has no revival statute at all. Connecticut, Delaware, Mississippi, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, and Wyoming leave the question to the courts. Vermont is the instructive case: it adopted the UPC's revocation section, including the replace-or-supplement presumptions rebuttable only by clear and convincing evidence, without the companion revival section. A Vermont testator therefore gets a highly specified answer about whether the new will displaced the old one, and no statutory answer at all about whether destroying the new one brings the old one back.
Florida sits between the camps with a split rule worth noting: revoking a will that revoked a former will does not revive the former, but revoking a codicil presumptively restores the provisions that codicil had changed. Fla. Stat. § 732.508.
What counts as a revoking act, and who may perform it
Most states permit another person to perform the destructive act, but the required setting varies. The UPC states use "conscious presence," which asks whether the testator was aware of the act through sight, hearing, or general consciousness of events rather than whether the testator could see it. Older codes such as West Virginia's require the testator's "presence" and direction. The District of Columbia is the strictest, requiring presence, express direction, and consent.
The UPC states also settle a question older statutes leave open: a burning, tearing, or canceling revokes "whether or not the burn, tear, or cancellation touched any of the words on the will." That single sentence makes deliberate revocation easier to accomplish and accidental damage considerably more consequential. Statutes without it, such as Wyoming's five-act list and the District's four-act list, leave the marked-margin case unresolved.
Electronic wills are the newest fault line. Where a state has enacted an electronic-wills act, its revocation rule is usually separate and sometimes carries a different evidence standard than the paper rule. The District is the sharpest illustration: its 1965 paper statute states no evidence standard and no harmless-error escape, while its 2023 electronic chapter sets a preponderance standard for a revoking act and adds a harmless-error provision that can establish revocation, modification, or even revival on clear and convincing evidence.
Proof overlays and older-code outliers
A large modern-UPC cluster separates four questions that older statutes often combine: whether the later will replaces or supplements, whether a revoking act reaches a part, what proof rebuts the complete-disposition presumption, and whether revoking the later will restores the earlier instrument. Maine illustrates the full pattern: complete and incomplete dispositions create opposite presumptions, and physical revocation of a wholly revoking later will starts against revival while physical revocation of a partly revoking will starts in favor of restoring the revoked part. 18-C M.R.S. § 2-506 and § 2-508.
The cluster still has important proof differences. Montana and South Dakota let a noncompliant document or writing constitute a partial or complete revocation or revival on clear and convincing proof of intent. Mont. Code Ann. § 72-2-523 and SDCL § 29A-2-503. North Dakota has no matching harmless-error section but does have a separate Electronic Wills Act: an electronic will may revoke a prior will, and a physical act revoking the electronic will uses physical presence plus a preponderance burden. N.D.C.C. § 30.1-37-05.
Older schemes occupy the other end of the table. Rhode Island requires a later will/codicil or separate revocation writing to use its simultaneous two-witness will ceremony, makes marriage itself revoke a premarital will subject to stated exceptions, and supplies no general statutory revival rule. R.I. Gen. Laws §§ 33-5-9 to -10. Delaware names cancellation as its act route, preserves implied revocation, and states only a divorce-remarriage revival rule rather than a general restoration rule. 12 Del. C. §§ 208–209.
Family events do not all do the same thing
Nearly every jurisdiction revokes a former spouse's gifts on divorce, but the reach differs materially. The UPC states extend revocation to the former spouse's relatives, meaning in-laws who are no longer related to the testator, and sever joint tenancies and tenancies by the entirety into tenancies in common. North Dakota specifies that the result is equal tenancies in common. Wyoming, Alaska, and Iowa follow the broad relatives-included pattern. Vermont's § 320 is deliberately narrower, reaching only the former spouse, covering civil unions alongside marriage, and stating no severance rule and no remarriage-revival provision.
The District of Columbia is the survey's outlier: it has no divorce-revocation statute at all. Neither Title 18 nor Title 19 revokes anything on divorce. A surviving spouse or domestic partner instead claims through a separate renunciation-and-election right that operates against the will rather than revoking any part of it. In the District, a will that still names a former spouse generally continues to name them.
At the other end, Oregon and Rhode Island retain the older rule that a subsequent marriage revokes a will. Most states have abandoned it, treating a later marriage, birth, or adoption as triggering a separate omitted-spouse or omitted-child share rather than revoking anything. This survey keeps those in separate columns because conflating them is the most common error in secondary summaries of this area.
Where a code is silent on a will nobody can find, courts generally presume that a will last in the testator's custody and missing at death was destroyed with intent to revoke. That presumption is rebuttable, and it does not arise at all unless the testator in fact had access to the document.
Get this answered for your state
This survey compares every state side by side. Ask about your specific situation and see what your state's law says, with citations to the statutes.
Scroll sideways in the table to see all columns →
| State | Governing law and scope | Later will, codicil, or writing | Physical or electronic revoking act | Act by another person | Partial revocation | Intent, proof, and presumptions | Divorce, annulment, and other family events | Revival after a later will or revoking act | Reexecution, republication, and codicil effect |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama verified 2026-08-01 | Ala. Code §§ 43-8-1(34) and 43-8-136 to -138; 'will' includes codicils and testamentary instruments that merely revoke/revise another will. The current probate sections state no separate electronic-will or harmless-error regime. |
A subsequent will revokes the prior will/part expressly or by inconsistency (§ 43-8-136(a)). Section 43-8-138 permits revival evidence from circumstances or a contemporary/subsequent written declaration only when the declaration is testator-signed and attested under § 43-8-131. |
Burn, tear, cancel, obliterate, or destroy the will with intent and purpose (§ 43-8-136(b)). The subsection states no partial physical-act or electronic-record deletion/custodian route. |
Allowed in the testator's presence and with the testator's consent and direction; when another person performs the act, at least two witnesses must prove that consent and direction (§ 43-8-136(b)) |
A subsequent will may revoke the prior will or part. The physical-act subsection refers to revocation of 'a will,' not a part, so § 43-8-136 states no partial revocation-by-act route. |
Physical revocation requires intent and purpose; a directed act adds two-witness proof of consent/direction. Section 43-8-136 states no quantified standard for the act itself or missing-original presumption. Revival intent must satisfy § 43-8-138's circumstance or formally attested written-declaration route. |
Divorce/annulment revokes will gifts, property appointments, powers, and executor/trustee/guardian nominations for the former spouse unless the will expressly provides otherwise; provisions operate as if the spouse failed to survive. Remarriage revives provisions revoked solely by § 43-8-137; separation is not divorce, and no other circumstance change revokes. |
After revocation of a second will under § 43-8-136, the first remains revoked unless circumstances or a testator-signed, properly attested contemporary/subsequent writing shows intent that it take effect. If a third will revokes the second, the first returns only as the third will's terms show (§ 43-8-138). |
A codicil and a testamentary revocation/revision instrument are included in 'will.' Alabama states no possession-only or oral-declaration route; restoration uses a third will's terms or § 43-8-138(a)'s signed-and-attested written declaration/circumstance evidence. |
| Alaska verified 2026-08-16 | AS 13.12.507 (revocation), 13.12.508 (change of circumstances), 13.12.509 (revival), and 13.12.804 (divorce/annulment), within Alaska's Uniform Probate Code. AS 13.06.068 adds a choice-of-law overlay that can send the revocation question to another jurisdiction's law. No electronic-will statute; the wills article uses 'will' throughout with no codicil-specific provision. |
A will or part is revoked 'by executing a subsequent will that revokes the previous will or part expressly or by inconsistency' (§ 13.12.507(a)(1)). Where the later will does not expressly revoke, it 'wholly revokes the previous will by inconsistency if the testator intended the subsequent will to replace rather than supplement' it (subsection (b)). No separate non-will revocation writing exists, so a revoking instrument must satisfy AS 13.12.502: writing, signed by the testator or by another in the testator's conscious presence and at the testator's direction, and signed by at least two witnesses each within a reasonable time after witnessing the signing or the testator's acknowledgment — or qualify as a holographic will with signature and material portions in the testator's handwriting. |
A 'revocatory act on the will' done 'with the intent and for the purpose of revoking the will or part of the will' (§ 13.12.507(a)(2)). The defined acts are burning, tearing, canceling, obliterating, or destroying the will or any part of it, and the act counts 'whether or not the burn, tear, or cancellation touched any of the words on the will.' No deletion, electronic-record, or signature-specific route is stated. |
Permitted where another individual performed the act 'in the testator's conscious presence and by the testator's direction' (§ 13.12.507(a)(2)). Conscious presence, not physical line of sight, is the test. No witness count, writing, or separate proof requirement applies to the directed act. |
Allowed by both routes. The instrument route reaches 'a part' expressly (§ 13.12.507(a)(1)), and the § 13.12.507(d) supplement presumption leaves both wills operative except where inconsistent. The act route reaches 'the will or part of the will' and 'any part of it' (§ 13.12.507(a)(2)). |
Revocatory intent is required for the act route. Two statutory presumptions govern later wills, each rebuttable only 'by clear and convincing evidence': a subsequent will making a complete disposition of the estate is presumed to REPLACE, so the previous will is revoked and only the later one operates (§ 13.12.507(c)); one not making a complete disposition is presumed to SUPPLEMENT, revoking only to the extent of inconsistency (§ 13.12.507(d)). No presumption of revocation arises from a missing or mutilated original. A signature on a self-proving affidavit attached to a will counts as a signature on the will if needed to prove due execution (§ 13.12.504(c)). |
Divorce or annulment revokes revocable dispositions, appointments, powers of appointment, and fiduciary nominations for the former spouse AND for a relative of the former spouse, and severs joint tenancies with right of survivorship into tenancies in common (§ 13.12.804(a)). Excepted by the instrument's express terms, a court order, or a marital-division contract. Revoked interests take effect as if disclaimed; revoked fiduciary nominations as if the person died immediately before the divorce (subsection (c)). Provisions revoked solely by the section are revived by remarriage to the former spouse or by nullification of the divorce or annulment (subsection (d)). A separation decree that does not terminate marital status is not a divorce (subsection (j)(2)). Otherwise 'a change of circumstances does not revoke a will or a part of it' (§ 13.12.508), except felonious killing under § 13.12.803. |
Alaska has a full revival statute, and the answer depends on HOW the later will was revoked (§ 13.12.509). If the later will WHOLLY revoked the earlier one and is then revoked by a physical act, the earlier will stays revoked unless the circumstances of that revocation or the testator's contemporary or subsequent declarations make it evident the testator intended it to take effect — a default AGAINST revival (subsection (a)). If the later will only PARTLY revoked the earlier one and is then revoked by a physical act, the revoked part IS revived unless it is evident the testator did not so intend — a default FOR revival (subsection (b)). If the later will is instead revoked by another, still later will, the earlier will stays revoked except to the extent the terms of that later will show the testator intended it to take effect (subsection (c)). |
No reexecution or republication section. Revival under § 13.12.509 is the statutory restoration route, and subsection (c) makes the terms of a later will the only evidence that counts when the revocation was by a later instrument. A separate writing may be incorporated by reference if it existed when the will was executed and the will's language identifies it (§ 13.12.510). A restoring instrument must be executed as a will under § 13.12.502. |
| Arizona verified 2026-08-01 | A.R.S. §§ 14-1201(71), 14-2507 to -2509, and 14-2804; 'will' includes a codicil and may be paper or electronic |
A subsequent will revokes expressly or by inconsistency. Complete estate disposition presumes replacement; incomplete disposition presumes supplementation. Either presumption requires clear and convincing evidence to rebut (§ 14-2507). |
With revocatory intent, burn, tear, cancel, obliterate, render unreadable, or destroy the will or any part. A burn, tear, or cancellation need not touch the words. Because 'will' includes paper and electronic wills, the same statute governs both (§§ 14-1201, 14-2507). |
Allowed only in the testator's conscious presence and at the testator's direction; § 14-2507 states no separate witness-count proof rule |
Allowed by either route: a subsequent will may revoke a previous will or part, and a revocatory act may target the will or any part (§ 14-2507(A)) |
Revoking act requires intent. Complete later disposition presumes replacement; incomplete disposition presumes supplementation, each rebuttable only by clear and convincing evidence. Revival intent may be shown by circumstances and contemporary or later declarations (§§ 14-2507, -2509). |
Divorce/annulment revokes revocable gifts, appointments, powers, and fiduciary nominations for the former spouse and qualifying relatives unless an instrument, order, or marital-estate contract says otherwise; provisions operate by disclaimer/deemed death and revive on remarriage or nullification. Separation alone does not qualify; other circumstance changes do not revoke except § 14-2803. |
Physical revocation of a wholly revoking later will: earlier will stays revoked unless revival intent is evident. Physical revocation of a partly revoking later will: revoked part revives unless contrary intent is evident. Revocation by another later will: no revival unless that later will's terms show revival intent (§ 14-2509). |
A codicil is a will, so a duly executed codicil can revoke or revive under the same later-will rules. Section 14-2509(C) restores an earlier will or part to the extent the terms of the later revoking will show intent; the cited sections state no separate republication-by-possession rule. |
| Arkansas verified 2026-08-01 | Ark. Code Ann. §§ 28-25-109 and -110; whole or partial revocation of wills by later will or act, divorce/annulment effect, and revival by reexecution or incorporation |
A subsequent will may revoke the prior will or part expressly or by inconsistency (§ 28-25-109(a)(1)); the statute does not authorize a standalone informal revocation writing |
Burn, tear, cancel, obliterate, or destroy the will or part, with intent and for the purpose of revocation (§ 28-25-109(a)(2)); no separate electronic act is stated |
Allowed in the testator's presence and by the testator's direction; § 28-25-109 states no separate witness count |
Yes, by later will or listed physical act. Reattestation of the remainder is not required (§ 28-25-109(a), (c)). |
A physical act requires intent and purpose to revoke. Section 28-25-109 states no quantified proof standard or missing-original presumption. |
Divorce or annulment revokes all will provisions favoring the former spouse. Except for those events, no change in circumstances, condition, or marital status revokes the will, subject to the spouse-election statute (§ 28-25-109(b)). |
No automatic revival. A revoked or invalid will or part can be revived only by reexecution or another will incorporating it by reference (§ 28-25-110). |
Reexecute the revoked/invalid will or part, or execute another will that incorporates it by reference. Section 28-25-110 states no separate republication-by-codicil or revoked-codicil restoration rule. |
| California verified 2026-08-01 | Cal. Prob. Code §§ 88, 6120–6124; ‘will’ includes codicil and a revocation-only testamentary instrument |
Subsequent will revokes expressly or by inconsistency; § 88 includes codicils and revocation-only testamentary instruments (§§ 88, 6120(a)) |
Burn, tear, cancel, obliterate, or destroy with revocatory intent; no electronic-specific act stated (§ 6120(b)) |
Allowed in testator's presence and at testator's direction; no separate witness count stated (§ 6120(b)) |
Allowed: § 6120 reaches a will or any part, by later will or listed act (§ 6120) |
Act requires intent and purpose to revoke; missing last-possessed original creates rebuttable production-burden presumption (§§ 6120, 6124) |
Divorce/annulment revokes listed former-spouse provisions; partnership termination has parallel rule; reconciliation revives (§§ 6122–6122.1) |
No automatic revival; circumstances/declarations control after an act, while a third will must show revival in its terms (§ 6123) |
No separate reexecution rule in this chapter; a third will can restore as its terms show, and ‘will’ includes codicil (§§ 88, 6123) |
| Colorado verified 2026-08-01 | C.R.S. §§ 15-10-201(59), 15-11-503, 15-11-507 to -509, 15-11-804, and 15-11-1303/-1307; 'will' includes codicils and revoking/revising instruments, and electronic wills are wills for all purposes |
A subsequent will revokes all/part expressly or by inconsistency. Complete disposition presumes replacement; incomplete disposition presumes supplementation, each rebuttable by clear and convincing evidence. A signed/acknowledged defective writing may qualify through § 15-11-503's clear-and-convincing harmless-error route. |
Traditional: burn, tear, cancel, obliterate, or destroy the will/part with intent and purpose; burn, tear, or cancellation need not touch words (§ 15-11-507). Electronic: a physical act works only on clear-and-convincing proof of intent and performance (§ 15-11-1307). |
Traditional: another individual may act in the testator's conscious presence and at the testator's direction. Electronic: the directed person must perform the physical act in the testator's physical presence, proved by clear and convincing evidence (§§ 15-11-507, -1307). |
Allowed by later will and physical act in both regimes; §§ 15-11-507 and 15-11-1307 repeatedly reach all/part of a previous or electronic will |
Traditional physical act requires intent and purpose. Later complete/incomplete disposition creates replacement/supplement presumptions rebuttable by clear and convincing evidence. Electronic physical-act revocation and harmless-error treatment of a defective revocation/revival writing also require clear and convincing evidence. |
Divorce/annulment revokes revocable gifts, powers, and fiduciary nominations for the former spouse and qualifying relatives, subject to governing-instrument, court-order, and marital-estate-contract exceptions; remarriage/nullification revives provisions revoked solely by § 15-11-804. Other circumstance changes do not revoke except as §§ 15-11-803/-804 provide. |
Physical revocation of a wholly revoking later will leaves the prior will revoked unless circumstances or declarations show revival intent; physical revocation of a partly revoking later will revives the prior part unless contrary intent appears. Revocation by a still later will revives only as that will's terms show (§ 15-11-509). |
A codicil and an instrument that merely revokes/revises another will are included in 'will.' Colorado states no universal reexecution-only route: § 15-11-509 governs revival, and § 15-11-503 can validate a signed/acknowledged defective revival writing on clear-and-convincing proof. |
| Connecticut verified 2026-08-01 | Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 45a-257 to -257f; the current family-event rules apply to wills executed on/after Jan. 1, 1997, while § 45a-257e preserves the older regime for wills executed Oct. 1, 1967–Dec. 31, 1996 |
A later will or codicil is a statutory revocation method (§ 45a-257). The section states no express-versus-inconsistency rule and authorizes no standalone informal revocation writing. |
Burning, cancelling, tearing, or obliterating the will/codicil (§ 45a-257). The statute does not list discarding, deleting, or a separate electronic act. |
Allowed in the testator's presence and by the testator's direction; § 45a-257 states no separate witness count or quantified proof standard |
A later codicil is a listed method, but § 45a-257 does not expressly say whether a physical act against only one provision is effective; do not assume a cross-out is a valid partial revocation from the statute text alone |
The current sections state no quantified intent/proof standard, directed-act witness count, or missing-original presumption; those issues are not codified in §§ 45a-257 to -257f |
Post-1997 wills: later marriage and later-born/adopted children invoke omitted-heir shares (§§ 45a-257a, -257b), while divorce/annulment revokes former-spouse gifts, powers, and fiduciary nominations; remarriage revives them, but separation does not trigger the rule (§ 45a-257c). Older 1967–1996 wills remain under the prior family-event law (§ 45a-257e). |
No general statutory revival rule for an earlier will after a later instrument is revoked. Family exception: remarriage revives provisions revoked solely by § 45a-257c. |
Section 45a-257 lists a later will or codicil as a revocation route, but §§ 45a-257 to -257f state no general reexecution, republication, incorporation, or revoked-codicil restoration rule |
| Delaware verified 2026-08-01 | 12 Del. C. §§ 202, 208–209. Section 208 governs alteration/revocation of a last will or any clause by cancellation, valid later will, formal writing, and preserved implied revocation; § 209 governs divorce/annulment, separation, other changed circumstances, and remarriage revival. The current chapter states no general revival/republication section or electronic-will route. |
A valid last will and testament may revoke or alter (§ 208). A separate writing must be signed by the testator (or at express direction in the testator's presence) and attested/subscribed in the testator's presence by at least two credible witnesses—the same core formalities as § 202. Section 208 does not separately name codicils or state an express-versus-inconsistency formula or required content for the writing. |
Cancellation by the testator is an express route (§ 208). The section does not list burning, tearing, obliterating, destruction, deletion, or a separate electronic-record act. |
Another person may cancel only in the testator's presence and by the testator's express direction (§ 208). Section 208 states no witness requirement for the cancellation itself. |
Expressly permitted: § 208 applies to a last will and testament 'or any clause thereof' and allows alteration as well as revocation through its stated routes. |
Section 208 states no express revocatory-intent phrase for cancellation, quantified proof standard, later-will replacement presumption, or missing-original presumption. It expressly says its clause neither precludes nor extends to an implied revocation. Section 209 separately says no changes or circumstances other than those it describes revoke a will or part. |
Divorce/annulment revokes former-spouse property dispositions/appointments, powers of appointment, and nominations as executor, trustee, guardian, or other fiduciary unless the will expressly provides otherwise (§ 209). The will operates as if the former spouse failed to survive. Remarriage revives provisions revoked solely by § 209; separation that preserves marital status is not divorce, and no other change or circumstance revokes a will or part under that section. |
No general statutory revival rule appears in current Chapter 2 after a later will, witnessed writing, or cancellation is itself revoked. Section 209 expressly revives only provisions revoked solely by divorce/annulment when the testator remarries the former spouse. |
Current Chapter 2 states no general reexecution, republication, incorporation, or revoked-codicil restoration rule. A valid later will or qualifying witnessed writing can make a new alteration/revocation under § 208, but the chapter does not say canceling that instrument republishes an earlier will. |
| District of Columbia verified 2026-08-01 | D.C. Code § 18-109 (paper revocation and revival) with execution formalities in § 18-103, plus the separate Uniform Electronic Wills Act at §§ 18-901 to 18-911, whose § 18-907 supplies its own revocation rule. Title 18 covers wills, codicils, and the parts of each. No divorce, marriage, or birth revocation statute appears in Title 18 or in Title 19. |
A will or codicil, or a part, may be revoked by 'a later will, codicil, or other writing declaring the revocation, executed as provided by section 18-103 or 18-107' (§ 18-109(a)(1)). Unlike most states the District does allow a separate revocation WRITING, but it must carry the same formalities as a will — in writing and signed by the testator or by another in the testator's presence and by express direction, and attested and subscribed in the testator's presence by at least two credible witnesses. Section 18-107's narrow nuncupative route reaches only a person in actual military or naval service or a mariner at sea. Revocation by a later instrument takes effect on execution of that instrument (Creech, 989 A.2d at 187). |
Burning, tearing, canceling, or obliterating the will or codicil, or the part, 'with the intention of revoking it' (§ 18-109(a)(2)). Four acts only — 'destroying' is not on the paper list — and the section states no rule about whether the act must touch the words. Electronic wills are governed separately: § 18-907(b)(2) revokes by 'a physical act' where the revocatory intent is established by a preponderance of the evidence. |
Permitted for a paper will where the act is done 'by a person in his presence and by his express direction and consent' (§ 18-109(a)(2)). The District requires BOTH express direction AND consent, and the act must be in the testator's presence. For an electronic will, § 18-907(b)(2) instead requires that the testator 'directed another individual who performed the act in the testator's physical presence.' |
Expressly allowed by both paper routes: § 18-109(a) opens 'A will or codicil, or a part thereof, may not be revoked, except ...' and the act route reaches 'the part thereof.' Section 18-907(a)-(b) likewise lets an electronic will revoke 'all or part' of a previous will and be revoked in part. Where a codicil revokes a will item and supplies no substitute that survives, the revoked item passes as intestate property (Creech, 989 A.2d at 189). |
The paper statute requires 'the intention of revoking' but states no evidence standard and no missing-original rule. The District instead applies a judicially recognized presumption: where a will or codicil known to have existed in the testator's lifetime and in the testator's custody or ready access cannot be found at death, it is presumed destroyed with revocatory intent, and absent rebutting evidence that presumption justifies a finding of revocation (Webb v. Lohnes, quoted in Creech, 989 A.2d at 188). The presumption is rebuttable; the proponent of a copy must show by a preponderance that the testator did not destroy the instrument with revocatory intent, and producing an executed copy alone does not rebut it. If the original was out of the testator's reach when it went missing, the presumption does not apply at all. For electronic wills the statute itself sets a preponderance standard (§ 18-907(b)(2)). |
No divorce-revocation statute. Neither Title 18 nor Title 19 contains a section revoking a former spouse's gifts or fiduciary nominations on divorce or annulment, and there is no marriage, birth, or adoption revocation section. Section 18-109(a)'s opening words preserve revocation 'by implication of law,' leaving family-status effects to general law rather than a statutory list. A surviving spouse or domestic partner instead has a separate renunciation-and-election right under D.C. Code §§ 19-112 to 19-114, which operates against the will rather than revoking it. |
Strict and route-independent: 'A will or codicil, or a part thereof, after it is revoked, may not be revived otherwise than by its re-execution, or by a codicil executed as provided in the case of wills, and then only to the extent to which an intention to revive is shown' (§ 18-109(b)). Destroying the later instrument does not restore the earlier one — revoking a codicil does not reinstate the will items it had revoked (Creech, 989 A.2d at 187-88). Electronic wills add one route the paper rule lacks: under § 18-906 a non-complying record readable as text is deemed compliant if the proponent shows by clear and convincing evidence that the decedent intended it as 'a partial or complete revival of the decedent's formerly revoked will or part of the will.' |
Reexecution and a will-formal codicil are the only two paper revival routes, each limited to the extent revival intent is shown (§ 18-109(b)). No statutory republication-by-codicil rule and no deemed-date provision appear in Title 18. Revoking a codicil leaves the underlying will's revoked items revoked, which can produce partial intestacy. |
| Florida verified 2026-08-01 | Fla. Stat. §§ 732.505–.511; wills, codicils, and electronic wills |
Later inconsistent will/codicil revokes only to inconsistency; express revoking writing must use will formalities (§ 732.505) |
Paper: burn, tear, cancel, deface, obliterate, or destroy; electronic: delete, cancel, render unreadable, or obliterate (§ 732.506) |
Allowed at testator's direction and in testator's presence, with revocatory intent (§ 732.506) |
Allowed by inconsistency or express formal writing; § 732.506 also reaches a will or codicil, not just the whole estate plan (§§ 732.505–.506) |
Revoking act requires intent and purpose; electronic-will revocation requires clear and convincing proof (§ 732.506) |
Divorce voids spouse-affecting provisions with exceptions; marriage, birth, or adoption does not revoke the will (§ 732.507) |
Revoking a later will does not revive the former will; revoked codicil presumptively restores changed provisions (§ 732.508) |
Reexecute or execute a formal republishing codicil; codicil referring to will republishes it; revoking will revokes its codicils (§§ 732.509–.511) |
| Georgia verified 2026-08-01 | O.C.G.A. §§ 53-4-40–50; statutory 'will' includes all codicils (§ 53-1-2) |
Express revocation by later will/other will-formal writing; inconsistent later will revokes only when effective (§§ 53-4-42–43) |
Any destruction or obliteration with intent; material-part obliteration/cancellation raises rebuttable intent presumption; no electronic act listed (§ 53-4-44) |
Allowed at testator's direction; statute states no presence or separate witness requirement (§ 53-4-44) |
Implied revocation reaches only inconsistency; material-part cancellation and written partial revocation recognized (§§ 53-4-44–45, 53-4-47) |
Intent always required; material-part and missing-original presumptions rebutted by preponderance; copy also proved by preponderance (§§ 53-4-41, 53-4-44, 53-4-46) |
Marriage/birth/adoption can supply intestate share; divorce/annulment treats former spouse as predeceased; remarriage can revive (§§ 53-4-48–49) |
Whole/partial revival uses different intent defaults depending on later writing versus act (§ 53-4-45) |
Republish revoked will by testator-executed writing subscribed and attested with will formalities (§ 53-4-50) |
| Hawaii verified 2026-08-01 | HRS §§ 560:2-503, 560:2-507–509, and 560:2-804; whole/partial revocation, harmless-error writings, changed circumstances, revival, divorce/annulment, and reciprocal-beneficiary termination. The sections state no separate electronic-will revocation method. |
A subsequent will revokes a previous will or part expressly or by inconsistency (§ 560:2-507(a)(1)). A document or writing that failed § 560:2-502 execution may still operate as a partial or complete revocation if clear and convincing evidence proves the decedent intended that result (§ 560:2-503(2)); Hawaii therefore has a statutory curative route beyond a duly executed later will. |
Burn, tear, cancel, obliterate, or destroy the will or any part with intent and purpose to revoke (§ 560:2-507(a)(2)). A burn, tear, or cancellation counts even if it touches none of the will's words. No deletion, rendering-unreadable, or electronic-record-control act is stated. |
Allowed only in the testator's conscious presence and at the testator's direction (§ 560:2-507(a)(2)). The section states no separate witness count for the directed act. |
Expressly allowed by later will, physical act, and harmless-error writing. Section 560:2-507 reaches a will or any part; § 560:2-503 expressly covers partial or complete revocation and partial or complete revival. |
Physical revocation requires intent and purpose. A complete-disposition later will is presumed to replace the prior will; unless rebutted by clear and convincing evidence, only the later will operates. An incomplete-disposition later will is presumed to supplement; unless rebutted by clear and convincing evidence, both operate outside inconsistencies (§ 560:2-507(b)–(d)). A noncompliant revocation/alteration/revival writing requires clear and convincing intent proof (§ 560:2-503). |
Subject to the instrument, court-order, and estate-division-contract exceptions, divorce/annulment or termination of a reciprocal-beneficiary relationship revokes revocable dispositions, powers, and fiduciary nominations for the former spouse/beneficiary and their qualifying relatives (§ 560:2-804). The instrument operates as if they disclaimed or, for nominations, predeceased. Remarriage/nullification or re-registering the reciprocal-beneficiary relationship revives provisions revoked solely by the section. Non-status separation is not divorce; no other changed circumstance revokes apart from § 560:2-803's homicide rule. |
Whole earlier will: after the wholly revoking later will is revoked by act, the earlier will stays revoked unless circumstances or contemporary/subsequent declarations show revival intent (§ 560:2-509(a)). Partly revoked earlier will: the revoked part instead revives unless the same evidence shows contrary intent (§ 560:2-509(b)). If another later will revokes the intervening will, the earlier will or part revives only to the extent the newest will's terms show that intent (§ 560:2-509(c)). |
Sections 560:2-507–509 state no separate republication-by-codicil or revoked-codicil restoration rule. Section 560:2-503 supplies an additional writing-based route: a noncompliant document or writing is treated as properly executed if clear and convincing evidence shows intent for partial/complete revival of a formerly revoked will or portion. |
| Idaho verified 2026-08-01 | Idaho Code §§ 15-1-201(56), 15-2-507–509, and 15-2-1107. 'Will' includes a codicil and a testamentary instrument that merely revokes or revises another will. Part 5 governs paper wills; the Uniform Electronic Wills Act supplies a separate electronic-will revocation section. |
A subsequent will revokes a prior paper will or part expressly or by inconsistency (§ 15-2-507(a)); a subsequent will likewise revokes an electronic will or part expressly or by inconsistency (§ 15-2-1107(1)–(2)(a)). No informal-note route is stated, but the definition of will includes a qualifying revocation-only testamentary instrument (§ 15-1-201(56)). |
Paper: burn, tear, cancel, obliterate, or destroy the will or part with intent and purpose to revoke; revoking one duplicate revokes a will executed in duplicate (§ 15-2-507(b)–(c)). Electronic: a 'physical act' revokes all or part if the statutory intent, actor, presence, and preponderance standard are met (§ 15-2-1107(2)(b)); the section does not separately list deletion or loss of record control. |
Paper act: another person may act in the testator's presence and at the testator's direction (§ 15-2-507(b)). Electronic-will physical act: another individual may act at the testator's direction only in the testator's physical presence (§ 15-2-1107(2)(b)). Neither section adds witnesses for the directed act. |
Expressly allowed for both forms. Section 15-2-507 applies to a paper will 'or any part thereof,' by later will or physical act; § 15-2-1107 permits an electronic will to revoke all or part of a prior will and permits all or part of the electronic will to be revoked. |
Paper physical revocation requires intent and purpose to revoke (§ 15-2-507(b)). For an electronic will, the physical-act route must be established by a preponderance of the evidence, including the testator's intent (§ 15-2-1107(2)(b)). The surveyed sections state no later-will replacement/supplement presumption and no missing-original presumption. |
Unless the will expressly says otherwise, divorce or annulment revokes gifts/property appointments, general or special powers of appointment, and executor/trustee/conservator/guardian nominations for the former spouse; the will operates as if the former spouse failed to survive (§ 15-2-508). Remarriage revives provisions revoked solely by that section. A separation that preserves spouse status is not divorce, and no other changed circumstance revokes the will. |
If a second will that would have revoked the first is revoked by acts under § 15-2-507, the first remains revoked in whole or part unless the circumstances or the testator's contemporary/subsequent declarations show intent that it take effect as executed (§ 15-2-509(a)). If a third will revokes the second, the first stays revoked except to the extent the third will's terms show revival intent (§ 15-2-509(b)). |
Republication of a revoked will revives it (§ 15-2-509(c)); the section does not define the required republication act. Because 'will' includes a codicil, the same later-will and revival rules apply to codicils, but the statutes state no separate revoked-codicil restoration presumption. |
| Illinois verified 2026-08-01 | 755 ILCS 5/4-7 for ordinary wills; 755 ILCS 6/5-10 separately governs electronic-will revocation |
Later will may revoke expressly or by inconsistency; other paper revocation instrument must use will formalities (§ 4-7(a)); e-will may also be revoked by testator's written instrument (§ 5-10(a)) |
Paper: burn, cancel, tear, or obliterate; § 5-10 lists no deletion or other electronic destructive act |
Paper act allowed in testator's presence and by testator's direction and consent; no parallel third-person act in § 5-10 |
Later-will inconsistency revokes only to its extent; § 4-7 does not expressly authorize partial revocation by a destructive act |
Paper section states exclusive methods but no separate proof standard; missing e-will and certified paper copy create revocation presumption (§ 5-10(b)) |
Divorce or invalidity judgment revokes former-spouse gifts, powers, and fiduciary nominations; other circumstance or marital-status changes do not revoke (§ 4-7(b)) |
Totally revoked will revives only by reexecution or a formal revival instrument; revoked partial-revocation instrument restores the part (§ 4-7(c)) |
Reexecute, or sign and attest a revival instrument with 2 credible witnesses; no separate statutory codicil-republication route (§§ 4-3, 4-7(c)) |
| Indiana verified 2026-08-01 | Ind. Code §§ 29-1-5-6 to -8 and 29-1-21-3, -8; paper and electronic wills, with 'will' and 'electronic will' definitions that include qualifying codicils |
Paper: another revoking writing must be signed, subscribed, and attested under § 29-1-5-3 or -3.1. Electronic: a new electronic or paper will may revoke only by explicitly revoking and superseding all prior wills (§§ 29-1-5-6, 29-1-21-8(b)). |
Paper: destroy or mutilate with intent. Electronic: permanently delete every controlled copy or render it unreadable/nonretrievable; custodial deletion requires written instruction and statutory preservation steps (§§ 29-1-5-6, 29-1-21-8(c), (e)). |
Paper: another person may destroy/mutilate only in testator's presence and at testator's direction. Electronic: testator may direct a custodian/attorney in writing to delete or render the record unreadable/nonretrievable after the required affidavit and converted copy (§§ 29-1-5-6, 29-1-21-8(e)). |
Paper will may be revoked in part only by the formal-writing route; destruction or mutilation cannot partially revoke (§ 29-1-5-6). Section 29-1-21-8 describes exclusive revocation of an electronic will and states no separate partial-deletion route. |
Paper act requires intent to revoke. If an electronic original or converted copy is missing after death, the same presumption used for a missing paper will applies; custodial deletion creates an affidavit and converted copy (§§ 29-1-5-6, 29-1-21-8(e)-(f)). |
Dissolution or annulment revokes all will provisions in favor of the former spouse at that time; remarriage reinstates them. Current § 29-1-5-8 states no revocation rule for marriage, birth, adoption, or separation. |
Revoking a second will does not revive the first unless the revocation's terms show revival intent or the testator duly republishes the first will (§ 29-1-5-6). Divorce-revoked provisions are reinstated on remarriage (§ 29-1-5-8). |
Duly republishing the previous will after revocation is an express revival route. A qualifying electronic codicil can amend a paper or electronic will, and 'will' includes an instrument that revives or revokes another will (§§ 29-1-5-6, 29-1-21-3(10), (22)). |
| Iowa verified 2026-08-01 | Iowa Code §§ 633.267, 633.271, 633.279, and 633.284; § 633.284 supplies the exclusive whole/partial revocation and revival methods, while §§ 633.267 and .271 address later children and divorce |
Execution of a subsequent will is a revocation route (§ 633.284). The section states no express-versus-inconsistency rule and authorizes no standalone informal revocation writing. |
Cancel or destroy the will or any part with revocatory intent (§ 633.284). Cancellation must be witnessed like a new will; the statute states no separate electronic act. |
Allowed at the testator's direction. If the method is cancellation, it must use new-will witnessing: two competent witnesses sign at the testator's request in the presence of the testator and each other (§§ 633.279, .284). |
Yes. Section 633.284 expressly applies cancellation, destruction, and the later-will route to a will 'in whole or in part.' |
Cancellation/destruction requires intent to revoke. Cancellation carries the full two-witness execution overlay; § 633.284 states no quantified proof standard or missing-original presumption. |
Divorce/dissolution revokes provisions for the spouse and qualifying spouse relatives unless the will says otherwise; remarriage reinstates them unless otherwise revoked, except for a beneficiary who died before remarriage (§ 633.271). Later-born/adopted children receive a statutory share rather than revoking the will (§ 633.267). |
No automatic revival: a revoked or invalid will or part revives only by reexecution or another will/codicil incorporating it by reference (§ 633.284) |
Reexecute the revoked instrument, or execute another will or codicil that incorporates the revoked/invalid will or part by reference. Destroying the later will, retaining the earlier original, or making an informal declaration is not a statutory revival route (§ 633.284). |
| Kansas verified 2026-08-01 | K.S.A. 59-610 through 59-612; written-will revocation/alteration, marriage-plus-child and divorce effects, and conditional revival |
Another written will may revoke or alter; a separate revocation/alteration writing must use the same formalities required for the will (§ 59-611). The section states no express-versus-inconsistency formula. |
Burn, tear, cancel, obliterate, or destroy the will with intent and purpose to revoke (§ 59-611); no separate electronic act is stated |
Allowed in the testator's presence and by the testator's direction; § 59-611 states no separate witness count for the act |
Revocation or alteration by another will or same-formality writing is allowed. Section 59-611 does not expressly say that a physical act against only one provision is effective. |
Physical revocation requires intent and purpose to revoke. Sections 59-610–.612 state no quantified proof standard or missing-original presumption. |
Marriage plus birth or adoption of a child revokes the will; divorce revokes all provisions favoring the former spouse (§ 59-610). The section states no annulment or remarriage rule. |
Revoking a second will does not revive the first unless the revocation terms show revival intent or the first will is duly republished (§ 59-612) |
Republish the first will in the presence of at least two competent witnesses who subscribe it in the testator's presence. Section 59-612 states no separate revoked-codicil restoration rule. |
| Kentucky verified 2026-08-01 | KRS 394.080, 394.090, 394.092, 394.100, 394.708, and 394.715; the traditional rules cover wills/codicils, while the electronic-will rules apply to wills of decedents dying on/after July 15, 2026 |
Traditional: revoke all/part by subsequent will/codicil or a writing declaring revocation and executed with will formalities (§ 394.080). Electronic: subsequent will revokes all/part expressly or by inconsistency (§ 394.708). |
Traditional: cut, tear, burn, obliterate, cancel, or destroy the will/codicil or its signature with intent (§ 394.080). Electronic: a physical act revokes all/part only on clear-and-convincing proof of intent and conduct (§ 394.708). |
Traditional: allowed in the testator's presence and at the testator's direction. Electronic: allowed at the testator's direction in the testator's physical presence, established by clear and convincing evidence (§§ 394.080, 394.708). |
Allowed in both regimes: § 394.080 applies to a will/codicil or any part and all three listed routes; § 394.708 permits an electronic will to revoke all/part and permits all/part of the electronic will to be revoked |
Traditional act requires intent but no quantified standard; the directed act has no separate statutory witness count. Electronic physical-act revocation requires clear and convincing evidence of intent and performance. The cited sections state no missing-original presumption. |
Marriage does not revoke a will (§ 394.090). Divorce/annulment revokes gifts, property appointments, powers, and executor/trustee/conservator/guardian nominations for the former spouse unless the will says otherwise; provisions operate as if the spouse failed to survive, and remarriage revives provisions revoked solely by § 394.092. |
A revoked will, codicil, or part revives only by reexecution or by a codicil executed with will formalities, and only to the extent the instrument shows intent to revive (§ 394.100) |
Kentucky expressly requires reexecution or a properly executed codicil for revival. Destroying or revoking the later instrument, retaining the old original, or making an informal declaration is not a statutory revival route (§ 394.100). |
| Louisiana verified 2026-08-01 | La. Civ. Code arts. 1570 and 1606 to 1610; Louisiana uses 'testament,' 'legacy,' and 'testamentary provision' rather than the common-law will/codicil framework, and separates whole-testament revocation from provision-level revocation |
Whole: declare revocation in a testament form or authentic act, or identify/clearly revoke in a writing entirely handwritten and signed by the testator (art. 1607). Part: declare in testament form or make a subsequent incompatible testamentary disposition/provision (art. 1608). |
Whole testament may be physically destroyed (§ art. 1607(1)). A legacy/provision may be clearly revoked by a signed writing on the testament itself; physical alteration alone and electronic deletion are not separately listed (art. 1608(4)). |
Another person may physically destroy the entire testament at the testator's direction; Article 1607 states no presence, witness-count, or quantified proof requirement |
Provision-level routes include testament-form declaration, incompatible later disposition, inter vivos disposition of the thing without reacquisition, signed writing on the testament, and qualifying divorce. Article 1607's physical-destruction route addresses the entire testament, not destruction of only a part. |
The handwritten whole-testament writing must identify and clearly revoke; the on-testament partial writing must clearly revoke and be signed. Articles 1607 to 1609 state no quantified proof standard or missing-original presumption. |
A legacy/provision for a spouse—and testamentary designations/appointments of the spouse—is revoked if the testator divorced that legatee after execution and remains divorced at death, unless the testament provides otherwise (art. 1608(5)). The article states no broader marriage, birth, adoption, separation, or relative rule. |
If a revocation made by juridical act is itself revoked before death, the original revocation is ineffective. That restoration rule expressly excludes revocation by physical destruction, inter vivos disposition of the thing, or divorce (art. 1609). |
Any modification not listed in the revocation articles must use a prescribed testament form (art. 1610). Louisiana's cited provisions do not use codicil/republication terminology; a physically destroyed testament is outside art. 1609's revoke-the-revocation restoration rule. |
| Maine verified 2026-08-01 | 18-C M.R.S. §§ 1-201(66), 2-506–2-508, and 2-804. 'Will' includes a codicil and a testamentary instrument that only revokes or revises another will. |
Execution of a subsequent will revokes expressly or by inconsistency (§ 2-506(1)(A)). A complete estate disposition creates a rebuttable replacement presumption; an incomplete disposition creates a rebuttable supplement presumption. Both require clear and convincing evidence to rebut (§ 2-506(2)–(4)). No informal separate-writing route is stated. |
Burning, tearing, canceling, obliterating, or destroying the will or any part (§ 2-506(1)(B)). A burn, tear, or cancellation need not touch the will's words. The section states no separate electronic-record act. |
Allowed when another individual performs the act in the testator's conscious presence and by the testator's direction (§ 2-506(1)(B)). The section states no witness requirement for the act. |
Expressly allowed by either route: a subsequent will may revoke the previous will 'or part,' and a revocatory act may target the will 'or any part of it' (§ 2-506(1)). Under the supplement presumption, inconsistency revokes only to its extent (§ 2-506(4)). |
A personal revocatory act requires intent and purpose to revoke (§ 2-506(1)(B)). Complete disposition presumptively means replacement; incomplete disposition presumptively means supplementation, each rebuttable only by clear and convincing evidence (§ 2-506(2)–(4)). Section 2-506 states no missing-original presumption or separate quantified proof standard for the physical act itself. |
Unless an express governing-instrument term, court order, or marital-estate contract provides otherwise, divorce/annulment revokes revocable dispositions, powers, and fiduciary nominations for the former spouse and qualifying former-spouse relatives (§ 2-804(1)–(2)); legal separation without terminating spouse status is not divorce. Revoked provisions operate under the statute's disclaimer/predecease rules and revive on remarriage or nullification (§ 2-804(4)–(5)). Other changed circumstances do not revoke except as §§ 2-507 and 2-804 state. |
If a later will wholly revoked the earlier will and is revoked by act, the earlier will stays revoked unless circumstances or declarations show intent to revive. If the later will only partly revoked it, the revoked part is revived unless the same evidence shows contrary intent. If another later will revokes the revoking will, revival extends only as its terms show (§ 2-508). |
Section 2-508 uses intent-based revival and states no separate reexecution or republication requirement. It gives no distinct revoked-codicil restoration presumption; § 1-201(66) includes a codicil within 'will,' so the statutory will framework applies. |
| Maryland verified 2026-08-01 | Md. Code, Estates & Trusts §§ 4-101, 4-102(e), 4-105, and 4-106; 'will' includes an intended codicil or instrument that revokes/revises, and a certified electronic/remotely witnessed will is the original |
A provision in a subsequent validly executed will revokes a prior will/part expressly or by necessary implication. It may expressly republish an existing earlier will revoked by an intermediate will (§ 4-105(b)(1)). |
Burn, cancel, tear, or obliterate the will (§ 4-105(b)(2)). The statute does not separately list deletion of an electronic record; a certified electronic/remotely witnessed will is deemed the original (§ 4-102(e)). |
Allowed only in the testator's presence and by the testator's express direction and consent; § 4-105 states no separate witness-count requirement |
Allowed within § 4-105's will-or-part scope; later-will revocation may target a prior will or part, while divorce revokes only spouse-related provisions |
Later will may revoke by necessary implication. Directed act requires express direction and consent; §§ 4-105 to -106 state no quantified proof standard or missing-original presumption. |
Later marriage plus testator's birth, adoption, or legitimation of a child revokes all premarital wills if child/descendant survives. Absolute divorce/annulment revokes only spouse-related provisions unless will/decree says otherwise (§ 4-105(b)(3)-(4)). |
Revoking the later will does not revive the prior will unless it still exists and is republished with will-execution formalities. A later valid will may also expressly republish an existing earlier will revoked by an intermediate will (§§ 4-105(b)(1)(ii), 4-106). |
Republication with the same formalities required for execution restores an existing prior will after revocation of the later will. A codicil is within the statutory will definition and may revoke, revise, or republish (§§ 4-101(k), 4-105, 4-106). |
| Massachusetts verified 2026-08-01 | Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 190B, §§ 1-201(57), 2-507 to -509, and 2-804; 'will' includes a codicil and a testamentary instrument that revokes or revises another will |
A subsequent will revokes expressly or by inconsistency. Complete estate disposition presumes replacement; incomplete disposition presumes supplementation (§ 2-507). |
With revocatory intent and purpose, burn, tear, cancel, obliterate, or destroy the will or any part; the cited statute states no separate electronic-record act (§ 2-507(a)(2)). |
Allowed only in the testator's conscious presence and at the testator's direction; § 2-507 states no separate witness-count requirement |
Allowed by either route: a subsequent will may revoke a previous will or part, and a revocatory act may target the will or any part (§ 2-507(a)) |
Revoking act requires intent and purpose. A complete later disposition presumes replacement; an incomplete one presumes supplementation, with no quantified rebuttal standard stated (§ 2-507). |
Divorce/annulment revokes revocable gifts, appointments, powers, and fiduciary nominations for the former spouse and qualifying relatives unless an instrument, order, or marital-estate contract says otherwise; revoked provisions revive on remarriage/nullification. Separation alone does not qualify; later marriage may instead trigger the omitted-spouse share (§§ 2-301, 2-508, 2-804). |
Physical revocation of a wholly revoking later will: earlier will stays revoked unless revival intent is evident. Physical revocation of a partly revoking later will: revoked part revives unless contrary intent is evident. Revocation by another later will: revival only to the extent that will's terms show intent (§ 2-509). |
A codicil is a will, so an executed later codicil may revoke or show revival under the later-will rules. The statutory restoration route in § 2-509(c) depends on the later will's terms showing intent. |
| Michigan verified 2026-08-01 | MCL 700.2503, .2507–.2509; 'will' includes codicils and revoking/revising testamentary instruments (MCL 700.1108) |
Later will revokes expressly or by inconsistency; § 2503 can validate a noncompliant revoking writing on clear-and-convincing proof (MCL 700.2503, .2507) |
Burn, tear, cancel, obliterate, or destroy all/part with intent; burn, tear, or cancellation need not touch words; no electronic act stated (MCL 700.2507(1)(b)) |
Allowed in testator's conscious presence and at testator's direction (MCL 700.2507(1)(b)) |
Later will, revocatory act, or § 2503 writing may revoke a part; inconsistency reaches only conflicting portions when later will supplements (MCL 700.2503, .2507) |
Physical-act intent required; complete/incomplete disposition creates replace/supplement presumptions rebuttable by clear and convincing evidence (MCL 700.2503, .2507) |
Divorce revokes revocable benefits/powers/nominations for former spouse and certain relatives; separation is not divorce; remarriage revives (MCL 700.2508, .2806–.2807) |
Whole/partial and act/later-will routes use different intent defaults; § 2503 also permits clear-and-convincing revival proof (MCL 700.2503, .2509) |
Codicil falls within 'will'; a compliant later will or a writing proved under § 2503 may revoke, alter, or revive (MCL 700.1108, .2503, .2507–.2509) |
| Minnesota verified 2026-08-01 | Minn. Stat. §§ 524.1-201(17), (43), (62), (64), 524.2-503, 524.2-507 to -509, and 524.2-804; 'will' includes electronic wills, codicils, and instruments that revoke/revise another will |
A subsequent will revokes all/part expressly or by inconsistency. Complete disposition presumes replacement; incomplete disposition presumes supplementation, rebuttable by clear and convincing evidence. Section 524.2-503 can cure a defective revocation writing on clear-and-convincing intent proof. |
Burn, tear, cancel, obliterate, or destroy the will/part with intent and purpose; the act need not touch words for burning, tearing, or canceling (§ 524.2-507). The same rule covers an electronic will through § 524.1-201; no separate deletion/custodian route is stated. |
Allowed at the testator's direction in the testator's conscious presence. For §§ 524.2-501 to -517, conscious presence includes physical see-and-hear proximity or simultaneous qualifying electronic sight-and-sound communication (§ 524.1-201(43)). |
Allowed by both routes: a subsequent will may revoke the prior will or part, and a revocatory act may target the will or part (§ 524.2-507) |
Physical act requires intent and purpose. Complete/incomplete later disposition creates replacement/supplement presumptions rebuttable by clear and convincing evidence. Harmless-error revocation or revival also requires clear-and-convincing intent proof and applies only to documents/writings executed on or after March 13, 2020. |
Dissolution/annulment revokes revocable gifts/beneficiary designations to the former spouse and nonshared family, powers for the former spouse, and fiduciary nominations for the spouse/nonshared family, subject to express-instrument, court-order, property-contract, and retirement-plan exceptions. Remarriage/nullification revives provisions revoked solely by § 524.2-804; other circumstance changes generally do not revoke. |
Physical revocation of a wholly revoking later will leaves the prior will revoked unless circumstances/declarations show revival intent; physical revocation of a partly revoking later will revives the prior part unless contrary intent appears. Revocation by a still later will revives only as its terms show (§ 524.2-509). |
A codicil and an instrument that merely revokes/revises another will are included in 'will.' Minnesota states no universal reexecution-only rule: § 524.2-509 governs revival, and § 524.2-503 can validate a defective revival writing by clear-and-convincing proof. |
| Mississippi verified 2026-08-01 | Miss. Code Ann. § 91-5-3; revocation of a devise or clause by act or later executed writing, plus after-born and posthumous-child consequences. Current Chapter 91-5 has no general revival section. |
A subsequent will, codicil, or declaration in writing, made and executed, may revoke (§ 91-5-3). The text states no express-versus-inconsistency formula. |
Destroy, cancel, or obliterate the devise or clause (§ 91-5-3); the section states no separate electronic act |
The testator may cause the act to be done in the testator's presence; § 91-5-3 states no separate witness count |
Yes. Section 91-5-3 applies to a devise or 'any clause thereof,' allowing the statutory act or executed-writing route to target a clause. |
Section 91-5-3 states no express intent language, quantified proof standard, or missing-original presumption |
No express divorce, annulment, or remarriage rule in § 91-5-3. A will made with no living child that omits any future child can lose effect under the section's after-born-child rule; a qualifying pretermitted posthumous child receives an intestate portion. |
No general statutory revival rule appears in current Chapter 91-5; the effect of revoking a later instrument is outside the chapter's express text |
No general reexecution, republication, or revoked-codicil restoration route is stated in current Chapter 91-5 |
| Missouri verified 2026-08-01 | Mo. Rev. Stat. §§ 472.010(30), 474.400 to .420, and 474.540 to .564; 'will' includes codicils and instruments that revoke or revive, and the electronic-wills act applies to decedents dying on/after Aug. 28, 2025 |
Traditional: a subsequent written will revokes, but § 474.400 does not specify express vs. inconsistency. Electronic: subsequent will revokes all/part expressly or by inconsistency; a testator-signed written instrument may also declare revocation (§ 474.552). |
Traditional: burn, cancel, tear, or obliterate the will/part (§ 474.400). Electronic: a physical act works if preponderance evidence shows testator's intent to revoke all/part and performance by testator or a directed person in testator's physical presence (§ 474.552.2(3)). |
Traditional: allowed in testator's presence and by testator's consent and direction. Electronic: allowed at testator's direction in testator's physical presence, proved by preponderance (§§ 474.400, 474.552). |
Allowed in both regimes: § 474.400 reaches a written will or part; § 474.552 permits an electronic will to revoke all/part of a previous will and permits all/part of the electronic will to be revoked |
Traditional § 474.400 states no express intent or quantified proof standard. Electronic physical act requires preponderance proof of intent and conduct; a signed but missing electronic will/certified copy is presumed revoked (§ 474.552.2(3), .3). |
Divorce revokes all provisions in favor of the former spouse and treats the spouse as dying at divorce. No other circumstance or condition change revokes a written will or part; § 474.420 states no remarriage revival. |
Revoking a second will by § 474.400 acts leaves the first revoked unless circumstances or contemporary/later declarations show revival intent. Revocation by a third will restores only to the extent its terms show intent (§ 474.410). |
A will includes a codicil and a testamentary instrument that merely revokes or revives another will (§§ 472.010(30), 474.542(8)). Section 474.410 makes restoration depend on revival intent; it states no separate possession-only rule. |
| Montana verified 2026-08-01 | Mont. Code Ann. §§ 72-1-103(59), 72-2-523, 72-2-527–529, and 72-2-814. 'Will' includes a codicil and a testamentary instrument that merely revokes or revises another will. The current sections cover whole/partial revocation, harmless-error writings, changed circumstances, divorce, and revival. |
A subsequent will revokes expressly or by inconsistency (§ 72-2-527(1)(a)). Complete disposition creates a rebuttable replacement presumption; incomplete disposition creates a rebuttable supplement presumption (§ 72-2-527(2)–(4)). A noncompliant document or writing may still revoke in whole or part on clear and convincing proof of intent (§ 72-2-523(2)). |
Burning, tearing, canceling, obliterating, or destroying the will or any part (§ 72-2-527(1)(b)); a burn, tear, or cancellation need not touch its words. The current sections state no separate electronic-record or recording route, and § 72-2-523 is limited to a 'document or writing.' |
Allowed when another individual performs the act in the testator's conscious presence and by the testator's direction (§ 72-2-527(1)(b)). The section states no witness requirement for the revoking act. |
Expressly permitted by a subsequent will or revocatory act (§ 72-2-527(1)); inconsistency under the supplement presumption revokes only to its extent (§ 72-2-527(4)). Section 72-2-523 also permits a noncompliant document or writing to constitute a partial revocation on clear and convincing proof. |
A personal revocatory act requires intent and purpose to revoke (§ 72-2-527(1)(b)). Complete versus incomplete estate disposition drives replace/supplement presumptions, rebuttable only by clear and convincing evidence (§ 72-2-527(2)–(4)). Clear and convincing evidence also cures a noncompliant written revocation or revival (§ 72-2-523). Section 72-2-527 states no missing-original presumption. |
Except for a Title 19 retirement system or an express governing-instrument term, court order, or marital-estate contract, divorce/annulment revokes revocable dispositions, powers, and fiduciary nominations for the former spouse and qualifying former-spouse relatives (§ 72-2-814(1)–(2)). Legal separation without terminating marital status is not divorce. The statute uses disclaimer/predecease construction and revives provisions on remarriage or nullification (§ 72-2-814(4)–(5)); other changes do not revoke except under §§ 72-2-528 and -814. |
If a later will wholly revoked the earlier will and is revoked by act, the earlier will stays revoked unless circumstances or declarations show intent to revive. If it only partly revoked the earlier will, the revoked part returns unless the same evidence shows contrary intent. If another later will revokes the revoking will, revival extends only as its terms show (§ 72-2-529). |
Section 72-2-529 uses intent-based revival without a separate reexecution/republication requirement. Section 72-2-523 adds a written harmless-error route: a noncompliant document or writing can constitute partial or complete revival on clear and convincing proof. The statutes state no distinct revoked-codicil restoration presumption; 'will' includes codicil (§ 72-1-103(59)). |
| Nebraska verified 2026-08-01 | Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 30-2209(53) and 30-2332–30-2334. 'Will' includes a codicil and another qualifying testamentary instrument that revokes or revises an earlier instrument. The sections govern whole/partial revocation, divorce/annulment effects, and revival; they state no separate electronic-will rule. |
A subsequent will revokes a prior will or part expressly or by inconsistency, as evident from its terms or competent evidence of its terms (§ 30-2332(1)). There is no separate informal-writing route; a revocation-only instrument must qualify as a 'will' by complying with §§ 30-2326–30-2338 (§ 30-2209(53)). |
Burning, tearing, canceling, obliterating, or destroying the will or any part, with intent and purpose to revoke (§ 30-2332(2)). The statute states no deletion, rendering-unreadable, or electronic-record-control method. |
Allowed only in the testator's presence and at the testator's direction (§ 30-2332(2)). The statute says 'presence,' not conscious presence, and states no additional witness requirement for the directed act. |
Expressly allowed: § 30-2332 opens with '[a] will or any part thereof' and applies that scope to both a subsequent will and the listed physical acts. The section states no separate restriction on canceling only a provision. |
The physical act requires both intent and purpose to revoke. The statute allows the later will's revocatory effect to be shown from its terms or competent evidence of its terms, but states no complete-disposition presumption, quantified statutory proof standard, or missing-original presumption (§ 30-2332). |
Unless the will, court order, or marital-estate contract provides otherwise, divorce or annulment revokes revocable dispositions, powers, and fiduciary nominations for the former spouse and former spouse's relatives; affected will provisions operate as if they disclaimed or, for nominations, predeceased (§ 30-2333). Remarriage or nullification revives provisions revoked solely by that section. A separation not terminating spouse status is not divorce, and no other change of circumstances revokes apart from § 30-2354's homicide rule. |
If a second will that would have revoked the first is revoked by acts under § 30-2332, the first remains revoked in whole or part unless the circumstances or the testator's contemporary/subsequent declarations show intent that it take effect as executed (§ 30-2334(a)). If a third will revokes the second, the first remains revoked except to the extent the third will's terms show revival intent (§ 30-2334(b)). |
No separate reexecution, republication-by-codicil, or revoked-codicil restoration section. Because § 30-2209(53) includes a codicil within 'will,' a formally executed later codicil can express the revival intent required by § 30-2334(b), but mere destruction or possession of an earlier instrument does not itself republish it. |
| Nevada verified 2026-08-01 | NRS 133.110–.130, with §§ 133.085, .320, and .340 for electronic wills, codicils, and revocations; § 133.160 supplies the later-born-child share rule |
Paper will: another properly executed written will/codicil, electronic will, or compliant electronic revocation (§ 133.120(1)). Electronic will: a properly executed later will, codicil, electronic will, or other writing revokes all or part expressly or by inconsistency (§ 133.120(2)(a)). |
Paper will or certified paper original: burn, tear, cancel, or obliterate with intent (§ 133.120). An electronic revocation must be an electronic record bearing the date, testator's electronic signature, and a qualifying authentication/notary/witness feature (§§ 133.085(1), .120). |
Allowed for a paper will or certified paper original when performed in the testator's presence and at the testator's direction; no separate statutory witness count is stated (§ 133.120(1)(a), (2)(b)). |
Expressly allowed for an electronic will by a later properly executed writing, expressly or by inconsistency (§ 133.120(2)(a)). Section 133.120 does not expressly authorize a physical act against only part of a paper will or certified paper original. |
Listed physical acts require intent to revoke. The cited sections state no quantified proof standard or missing-original presumption; electronic revocation carries execution, custody, and optional paper-certification requirements (§§ 133.085, .320, .340). |
Marriage after execution revokes only as to the surviving spouse unless a stated exception applies; divorce/annulment revokes former-spouse devises, beneficial interests, and personal-representative designation, subject to an approved agreement or court order (§§ 133.110, .115). A later-born child's intestate share leaves consistent will provisions intact (§ 133.160). |
Revoking a valid second will that included provisions revoking the first does not revive the first unless revival intent appears from the terms or manner of revocation, or the first will is reexecuted (§ 133.130). |
Reexecution of the first will is an express revival route. Section 133.130 also recognizes revival intent shown by the terms or manner of revoking the second will, but states no separate codicil-republication or revoked-codicil restoration rule. |
| New Hampshire verified 2026-08-20 | RSA 551:13–14; whole/partial revocation by later instrument, formal writing, act, divorce/annulment, and preserved implied-by-law revocation. Chapter 551 states no general revival/republication section and expressly bars electronic wills in RSA 551:2, III(b). |
Another valid will or codicil may revoke a will or clause. A separate writing also works if executed in the same manner as a will (RSA 551:13, I). The statute states no express-versus-inconsistency formula and provides no informal-note route. |
Cancel, tear, obliterate, or otherwise destroy the will or clause (§ 551:13, I). The statute does not separately list burning, deletion, or electronic-record control; RSA 551:2, III(b) says remote witnessing does not allow an electronic will or codicil. |
Allowed by another person with the testator's consent and in the testator's presence (§ 551:13, I). The statute uses 'consent,' not direction, and states no witness requirement for the revoking act. |
Expressly allowed: § 551:13, I applies to a will 'or clause thereof,' and the later-instrument, formal-writing, and physical-act routes share that scope. |
Section 551:13 lists the revoking methods but states no express revocatory-intent phrase, quantified proof standard, later-will presumption, or missing-original presumption. Section 551:14 separately preserves any revocation 'implied by law' from changes in the testator's or family's, devisees', legatees', or estate's circumstances. |
Unless the will says otherwise, divorce/annulment revokes former-spouse property dispositions/appointments, general or special powers, and nominations as executor, trustee, conservator, or guardian (§ 551:13, II). Property and offices operate as if the former spouse and the former spouse's descendants who are not also the decedent's heirs failed to survive; contingent gifts to those descendants keyed to the spouse's predeceasing are also revoked. Remarriage revives provisions revoked solely by the paragraph; non-status separation is not divorce. Section 551:13 says no other changed circumstance revokes, but § 551:14 preserves implied-by-law revocation from changed circumstances; the current text does not reconcile those provisions. |
No general statutory revival rule appears in current Chapter 551 for an earlier will or clause after a later will or physical act is revoked. Section 551:13, II expressly revives only provisions revoked solely by divorce when the testator remarries the former spouse. |
Chapter 551 states no general reexecution, republication, incorporation, or revoked-codicil restoration rule. A new valid will/codicil or same-formality writing can make a new revocation under § 551:13, I, but the chapter does not state that mere destruction of a later instrument republishes an earlier one. |
| New Jersey verified 2026-08-01 | N.J.S.A. 3B:3-3 and 3B:3-13–15; will is a governing instrument under N.J.S.A. 3B:1-1 |
Later will revokes expressly or by inconsistency; § 3B:3-3 can validate a noncompliant revoking writing on clear-and-convincing proof |
Burn, tear, cancel, obliterate, or destroy all/part with intent; burn, tear, or cancellation need not touch words; no electronic act stated (§ 3B:3-13) |
Allowed in testator's conscious presence and at testator's direction (§ 3B:3-13(b)) |
Later will, revocatory act, or § 3B:3-3 writing may revoke a part; inconsistency is partial when later will supplements (§§ 3B:3-3, -13) |
Complete/incomplete disposition creates replace/supplement presumptions rebuttable by clear and convincing evidence; same burden for § 3B:3-3 writing |
Divorce/annulment, including divorce from bed and board, revokes revocable benefits/powers/nominations for former spouse and certain relatives; remarriage revives (§ 3B:3-14) |
Whole/partial and act/later-will routes use different intent defaults; clear-and-convincing proof applies to act-based intent (§§ 3B:3-3, -15) |
Baseline revival by reexecution or duly executed codicil expressing revival intent; § 3B:3-3 can validate a noncompliant reviving writing (§ 3B:3-15) |
| New Mexico verified 2026-08-01 | NMSA 1978 §§ 45-1-201(A)(57), 45-2-507–509, and 45-2-804. 'Will' includes a codicil and a testamentary instrument that merely revokes or revises another will, but excludes a holographic will. The surveyed execution routes are witnessed or self-proved writings under §§ 45-2-502 and -504; § 45-2-507 states no separate electronic-will revoking act. |
A subsequent will revokes a previous will or part expressly or by inconsistency (§ 45-2-507(A)(1)). Another subsequent document works only if executed under the witnessed- or self-proved-will formalities of § 45-2-502 or -504 and expressly revokes the prior will or part (§ 45-2-507(A)(2)); an informal revocation note is insufficient. |
Burning, tearing, canceling, obliterating, or destroying the will or any part qualifies when performed with intent and purpose to revoke (§ 45-2-507(A)(3)). A burn, tear, or cancellation counts even if it touches none of the will's words. The section states no deletion, record-control, or other electronic-specific act. |
Another individual may perform the act only in the testator's conscious presence and at the testator's direction (§ 45-2-507(A)(3)). The section states no separate witness requirement for the directed act. |
Expressly allowed. A subsequent will may revoke a part expressly or by inconsistency; a formal subsequent document may expressly revoke a part; and a revocatory act may target the will or any part of it (§ 45-2-507(A)). An incomplete later will presumptively supplements the earlier will, leaving both operative except where inconsistent (§ 45-2-507(D)). |
A physical act requires intent and purpose to revoke. A complete-disposition later will is presumed to replace the earlier will; unless rebutted by clear and convincing evidence, the earlier will is wholly revoked. An incomplete-disposition later will is presumed to supplement; unless rebutted by clear and convincing evidence, revocation reaches only inconsistencies (§ 45-2-507(B)–(D)). The current sections state no separate missing-original presumption. |
Unless the will, a court order, or a marital-estate contract says otherwise, divorce or annulment revokes revocable dispositions, powers, and fiduciary nominations for the former spouse and the former spouse's relatives; the instrument operates as if they disclaimed or, for nominations, predeceased (§ 45-2-804). Remarriage or nullification revives provisions revoked solely by that section. A non-status separation is not divorce, and no other change of circumstances revokes a will apart from the separately governed homicide rule (§§ 45-2-508, -804). |
Whole earlier will: after the wholly revoking later will is revoked by the referenced 'revocatory act,' the earlier will stays revoked unless circumstances or contemporary/subsequent written declarations show intent that it take effect as executed (§ 45-2-509(A)). Partly revoked earlier will: the revoked part instead revives unless the same evidence shows contrary intent (§ 45-2-509(B)). If a third will revokes the later will, the earlier will or part revives only to the extent the third will's terms show that intent (§ 45-2-509(C)). Subsections A–B cite § 45-2-507(A)(2) as the 'revocatory act,' although current § 45-2-507 places physical acts in (A)(3); the official text is facially mismatched. |
The Act states no separate republication-by-codicil or revoked-codicil restoration rule. Because 'will' includes a codicil, the same §§ 45-2-507–509 rules govern it. Formal reexecution under § 45-2-502 or -504 can operate as a subsequent will, but § 45-2-509 also permits revival based on the specified intent evidence rather than making reexecution exclusive. |
| New York verified 2026-08-01 | N.Y. EPTL §§ 3-4.1, 3-4.6, 5-1.4; future electronic-wills act effective Dec. 12, 2027 |
Another will, or testator's clear revoking/altering writing executed with will formalities (EPTL § 3-4.1(a)(1)) |
Current paper rule: burn, tear, cut, cancel, obliterate, mutilate, or destroy the will; e-will custody-removal route begins Dec. 12, 2027 (§ 3-4.1; 2026 ch. 89) |
Must be in testator's presence and by direction; proved by 2 witnesses, neither the actor (EPTL § 3-4.1(a)(2)) |
Part may be revoked/altered by another will or formal writing; destructive-act text addresses revoking the will, not a part (§ 3-4.1(a)) |
Testator must intend revocation/alteration; directed act needs 2 disinterested-to-act witnesses (§ 3-4.1(a)) |
Divorce, annulment, or defined judicial separation revokes former-spouse benefits/powers/offices; treated as predeceased; remarriage revives (§ 5-1.4) |
No automatic revival when later will is revoked or altered (EPTL § 3-4.6(a)) |
Revive by incorporating codicil, formal revival writing, or reexecution/re-attestation; revoking will revokes all codicils (§§ 3-4.1(c), 3-4.6(b)) |
| North Carolina verified 2026-08-01 | N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 31-5.1–31-5.8; attorney-stored electronic record exception in § 31-72 |
Later written will, codicil, or other revocatory writing executed with written-will formalities (§ 31-5.1(1)) |
Burn, tear, cancel, obliterate, or destroy with intent; physical-act route ends after § 31-72 electronic storage (§§ 31-5.1(2), 31-72) |
Allowed at testator's direction and in testator's presence, unless the physical-act route has been eliminated by § 31-72 (§ 31-5.1(2)) |
Both later-writing and physical-act routes expressly reach any part of a written will; separate rule for oral wills (§§ 31-5.1–31-5.2) |
Physical act requires intent and purpose to revoke; § 31-72 storage makes later loss/destruction neither revocation nor a revocation presumption |
Marriage, birth, and adoption do not revoke; divorce/annulment deems former spouse predeceased unless an exception applies (§§ 31-5.3–31-5.5) |
Only by reexecution or another will incorporating the revoked will/part; § 31-5.4 has a later-document-plus-remarriage exception (§ 31-5.8) |
A will-formal codicil may revoke; revival statute names reexecution or an incorporating later will (§§ 31-5.1, 31-5.8) |
| North Dakota verified 2026-08-01 | N.D.C.C. §§ 30.1-08-07 through -09, 30.1-10-04, and 30.1-37-02/-05. The ordinary UPC sections govern whole/partial revocation, presumptions, changed circumstances, divorce/annulment, and revival; the Uniform Electronic Wills Act adds electronic-will revocation and says an electronic will is a will for all purposes except as modified. |
A subsequent will revokes expressly or by inconsistency (§ 30.1-08-07(1)(a)); complete disposition creates a rebuttable replacement presumption and incomplete disposition a rebuttable supplement presumption (§ 30.1-08-07(2)–(4)). An electronic will may revoke all or part of a previous will, and any subsequent will may revoke all or part of an electronic will expressly or by inconsistency (§ 30.1-37-05). No informal or harmless-error writing route is stated. |
Paper route: burn, tear, cancel, obliterate, or destroy the will or any part; a burn, tear, or cancellation need not touch its words (§ 30.1-08-07(1)(b)). Electronic route: a 'physical act' may revoke all or part if intent and the act are proved by a preponderance (§ 30.1-37-05(2)(b)); that section does not enumerate acts or separately name deletion. |
Paper act: another individual acts in the testator's conscious presence and by direction (§ 30.1-08-07(1)(b)). Electronic-will physical act: another individual acts at the testator's direction in the testator's physical presence, with the required facts proved by a preponderance (§ 30.1-37-05(2)(b)). Neither section adds witnesses to the revoking act. |
Expressly permitted for paper and electronic wills. Section 30.1-08-07 applies to a will or any part, and the supplement presumption revokes only to the extent of inconsistency; § 30.1-37-05 repeatedly covers all or part of an electronic or previous will. |
A personal paper act requires intent and purpose to revoke; complete/incomplete disposition drives replacement/supplement presumptions rebuttable by clear and convincing evidence (§ 30.1-08-07). An electronic-will physical act and intent require proof by a preponderance (§ 30.1-37-05). The sections state no missing-original presumption, and Chapter 30.1-08 has no harmless-error provision. |
Divorce or annulment revokes revocable dispositions, appointments, powers of appointment, and fiduciary nominations for the former spouse AND for a relative of the former spouse, and severs joint tenancies with right of survivorship into EQUAL tenancies in common (§ 30.1-10-04(2)). Excepted by the instrument's express terms, a court order, or a marital-division contract. Revoked interests take effect as if disclaimed; revoked fiduciary nominations as if the person died immediately before the divorce (subsection (4)). Provisions revoked solely by the section are revived by remarriage to the former spouse or by nullification of the divorce or annulment (subsection (5)). A separation decree not terminating marital status is not a divorce (subsection (1)(b)). Otherwise 'a change of circumstances does not revoke a will or any part of it' (§ 30.1-08-08), except felonious killing under § 30.1-10-03. |
For the § 30.1-08-07 paper-act route, a wholly revoked earlier will stays revoked unless circumstances/declarations show revival intent; a partly revoked provision returns unless contrary intent is shown. If another later will revokes the revoking will, revival extends only as its terms show (§ 30.1-08-09). Section 30.1-37-05 states no separate revival consequence for its electronic-will physical-act route. |
The current statutes state no harmless-error, separate reexecution, republication, or revoked-codicil restoration route. Section 30.1-37-02 applies general will law to electronic wills except as modified, but § 30.1-08-09's physical-act branches expressly reference acts under § 30.1-08-07; the text does not expressly extend those branches to a § 30.1-37-05 electronic-will physical act. |
| Ohio verified 2026-08-01 | Ohio Rev. Code §§ 2107.33 and 2107.38; ordinary wills, with codicils expressly allowed as revoking instruments |
Other written will/codicil executed under Chapter 2107, or other writing signed, attested, and subscribed like a will (§ 2107.33(A)(4)–(5)) |
Tear, cancel, obliterate, or destroy with intent to revoke; no electronic revoking act listed (§ 2107.33(A)(1)–(3)) |
At testator's request and in testator's presence, or without a stated presence condition under testator's express written direction (§ 2107.33(A)(2)–(3)) |
Codicil is an authorized formal revoking instrument; statute does not expressly authorize partial revocation by physical act (§ 2107.33(A)) |
Physical act requires revocatory intent; testator must have will-execution capacity when revoking; no separate statutory proof standard (§ 2107.33(A), (E)) |
Divorce, dissolution, annulment, or qualifying separation agreement revokes former-spouse provisions; remarriage or agreement termination revives them (§ 2107.33(B)–(C)) |
Revoking second will does not revive first unless revocation terms show revival intent or first will is republished (§ 2107.38) |
Section 2107.38 recognizes republication but prescribes no separate statutory form; § 2107.33 permits a formally executed codicil to revoke |
| Oklahoma verified 2026-08-01 | 84 O.S. §§ 91, 101–106, 113–114, and 906; §§ 101–106 govern traditional written wills, while § 906 separately governs electronic wills effective since Nov. 1, 2024 |
Traditional: a will-formal revocation writing; later will revokes expressly or where wholly inconsistent, leaving consistent prior terms effective (§§ 101, 105). Electronic: later will revokes all/part expressly or by inconsistency (§ 906). |
Traditional: burn, tear, cancel, obliterate, or destroy with intent/purpose; one duplicate may be revoked (§§ 101, 104). Electronic: any physical act proved under § 906's standard. |
Traditional: in the testator's presence and by direction; direction and injury/destruction must be proved by two witnesses (§§ 101–102). Electronic: directed individual acts in testator's physical presence, proved by a preponderance (§ 906). |
Traditional: permitted by formal writing or obliteration; partial obliteration must show intent, but fails if used to attempt a new disposition that was not legally effected (§§ 101, 103). Electronic: all or part may be revoked (§ 906). |
Traditional act requires intent and purpose; directed cancellation/destruction requires two witnesses. Electronic physical act requires preponderance proof of intent and performance. Section 91 allows a lost/destroyed will to be established but states no revocation presumption. |
Divorce/annulment revokes former-spouse provisions and treats the spouse as predeceased; no effect if decree is vacated, spouses remarry, or a later valid will/codicil follows (§ 114). Marriage alone is not a revoking event in the current §§ 101–114 scheme. |
Destroying, canceling, or revoking the later will does not revive the former unless the revocation terms show intent to renew it or the testator republishes the prior will (§ 106) |
Section 106 recognizes republication of the prior will but does not separately prescribe its form. Revoking a will revokes all its codicils (§ 113); mere survival of the older original is not automatic revival. |
| Oregon verified 2026-08-01 | ORS 111.005(31), 112.235(4), 112.238, and 112.275–.315; 'will' includes codicils and revocation/revival-only testamentary instruments, while Oregon excludes electronic records from the governing definition of writing |
Another will may revoke or alter (§ 112.285(1)). A signed or directed-signed defective writing may make a partial/complete revocation on clear-and-convincing proof of intent (§ 112.238). |
Whole will: burn, tear, cancel, obliterate, or destroy with revocatory intent (§ 112.285(2)). No separate electronic-will route; § 112.235(4) excludes an electronic record/document/image from 'writing.' |
Allowed at the testator's direction and in the testator's presence; injury/destruction by that person must be proved by at least two witnesses (§ 112.285(2)) |
By writing: yes under §§ 112.238 and 112.285(1). By physical act: no; partial marks do not revoke provisions, but clear-and-convincing evidence may show intent to revoke the entire will (§ 112.285(3)). |
Physical act requires revocatory intent; a directed act requires at least two witnesses. Harmless-error revocation needs clear-and-convincing intent proof. The exclusive statutory scheme states no missing-original presumption (§§ 112.238, 112.275, 112.285). |
Later marriage revokes the will if the spouse survives, subject to contemplation/contrary-intent, premarital-contract, and domestic-partner exceptions (§ 112.305). Divorce/annulment revokes former-spouse gifts and personal-representative nomination unless contrary intent appears and treats the spouse as not surviving (§ 112.315). |
No automatic revival: a revoked/invalid will or part can be revived only by reexecution or another will incorporating it by reference (§ 112.295) |
Reexecute the will, or execute another will—including a codicil under § 111.005(31)—that incorporates the revoked will or part by reference. Mere destruction of the later will or possession of the earlier original is not a statutory revival route (§ 112.295). |
| Pennsylvania verified 2026-08-01 | 20 Pa.C.S. §§ 2505–2507; written wills/codicils and circumstance-based modifications |
Another written will/codicil, or revoking writing executed and proved like a will (§ 2505(1)–(2)) |
Burn, tear, cancel, obliterate, or destroy the document with revocatory intent; no current e-will route (§ 2505(3)) |
In testator's presence and by express direction; direction proved by 2 competent witnesses (§ 2505(3)) |
Will, codicil, or any part may be revoked by any listed statutory method (§ 2505) |
Document act needs intent and purpose; directed act requires 2 oath/affirmation witnesses (§ 2505(3)) |
Divorce or qualifying pending divorce defeats spouse provisions; later marriage and child birth/adoption supply statutory shares (§ 2507) |
No automatic revival after later will is revoked (§ 2506) |
Revive by written revocation declaring intent or reexecution; oral republication alone ineffective (§ 2506) |
| Rhode Island verified 2026-08-01 | R.I. Gen. Laws §§ 33-5-1, 33-5-5, and 33-5-9 through -11. 'Will' includes a testament, codicil, and qualifying appointment by will or will-like writing. The chapter governs will-formal writings, physical acts, marriage, divorce, and changed circumstances, but states no general revival/republication section or electronic-will route. |
Another will or codicil may revoke if executed with § 33-5-5 formalities. A separate writing must declare an intention to revoke and be executed as a will (§ 33-5-10): writing/signature, two witnesses present together, and witness subscription in the testator's presence. Section 33-5-10 states no express-versus-inconsistency formula. |
Burning, tearing, or otherwise destroying the will with intent to revoke (§ 33-5-10). The section does not separately list canceling, obliterating, deletion, or an electronic-record act. |
Allowed when another person acts in the testator's presence and by the testator's direction, with intent to revoke (§ 33-5-10). The physical-act clause states no witness requirement. |
Section 33-5-10 opens by applying its exclusive methods to a will, codicil, 'or any part thereof,' so a properly executed later instrument or revocation writing may reach a part. The destructive-act phrase says burning, tearing, or otherwise destroying 'the will' and does not separately explain a partial physical cancellation. |
The separate writing must declare revocatory intent, and a physical act must be performed with intent to revoke (§ 33-5-10). The section states no quantified proof standard, later-will replacement presumption, or missing-original presumption. Section 33-5-11 bars revocation by a presumed intention based on altered circumstances. |
Marriage revokes a premarital will unless the will shows it was made in contemplation of that marriage; a limited power-of-appointment portion is excepted (§ 33-5-9). Entry of final divorce judgment revokes all former-spouse-benefit provisions in a pre-divorce will unless it contemplated divorce, and the balance operates as if the former spouse predeceased (§ 33-5-9.1). The sections do not state annulment, separation, birth, adoption, or remarriage revival rules. |
No general statutory revival rule appears in current Chapter 33-5 after a later will, codicil, revocation writing, or physical act is itself revoked. The chapter also states no remarriage-based revival of provisions revoked by divorce. |
Current Chapter 33-5 states no general reexecution, republication, incorporation, or revoked-codicil restoration rule. A new will or codicil can make a new revocation if executed under § 33-5-5, but the chapter does not say destruction of a later instrument republishes an earlier one. |
| South Carolina verified 2026-08-01 | S.C. Code Ann. §§ 62-1-201(53) and 62-2-506 to -508; 'will' includes codicils and testamentary instruments that merely revoke/revise another will. Section 62-2-507 separately governs divorce and other circumstance changes. |
A subsequent will revokes all/part expressly or by inconsistency. Complete disposition presumes replacement; incomplete disposition presumes supplementation, each rebuttable by clear and convincing evidence (§ 62-2-506). No separate harmless-error writing route appears in the current Part 5 text. |
Burn, tear, cancel, obliterate, or destroy the will/part with intent and purpose (§ 62-2-506). South Carolina's cited probate provisions state no separate electronic-will deletion or custodian route. |
Allowed only when the person acts in the testator's presence and at the testator's direction; § 62-2-506 states no separate witness-count or quantified proof standard for the act |
Allowed by both routes: § 62-2-506 applies to a will or any part, and permits a subsequent will or listed act to revoke the whole or part |
Physical revocation requires intent and purpose. Complete/incomplete later disposition creates replacement/supplement presumptions rebuttable by clear and convincing evidence. Whole/partial revival after an act also uses clear-and-convincing intent rules (§§ 62-2-506, -508). |
Divorce/annulment—including a qualifying property-rights/equitable-distribution order—revokes revocable gifts, beneficiary designations, powers, and fiduciary nominations for the former spouse, subject to express-instrument, court-order, and marital-estate-contract exceptions. Separate maintenance is not divorce; remarriage/nullification revives provisions revoked solely by § 62-2-507. |
After physical revocation of a wholly revoking later will, the prior will stays revoked unless clear and convincing evidence shows revival intent. After physical revocation of a partly revoking later will, the prior part revives unless clear and convincing evidence shows contrary intent. A still later will revives only as its terms show (§ 62-2-508). |
A codicil and an instrument that merely revokes/revises another will are included in 'will.' The cited statutes state no mandatory reexecution/republication-only route; § 62-2-508 makes revival turn on clear-and-convincing intent or the later will's terms. |
| South Dakota verified 2026-08-01 | SDCL §§ 29A-1-201(52), 29A-2-503, 29A-2-507–509, and 29A-2-804. 'Will' includes a codicil and an instrument that revokes or amends another will. The sections cover whole/partial revocation, harmless-error writings, changed circumstances, divorce/annulment, and revival; they state no separate electronic-will method. |
A subsequent will revokes expressly or by inconsistency (§ 29A-2-507(a)(1)). Complete disposition creates a rebuttable replacement presumption; incomplete disposition creates a rebuttable supplement presumption (§ 29A-2-507(b)–(d)). A noncompliant document or writing may still revoke in whole or part on clear and convincing proof of intent (§ 29A-2-503). |
Burning, tearing, canceling, obliterating, or destroying the will or any part (§ 29A-2-507(a)(2)); the act need not touch any words. The current sections state no separate deletion or electronic-record act, and § 29A-2-503 is limited to a document or writing. |
Allowed when another individual performs the act in the testator's conscious presence and by the testator's direction (§ 29A-2-507(a)(2)). The section states no witness requirement for the revoking act. |
Expressly permitted by a subsequent will or revocatory act (§ 29A-2-507(a)); inconsistency under the supplement presumption revokes only to its extent (§ 29A-2-507(d)). Section 29A-2-503 also permits a noncompliant document or writing to constitute a partial revocation on clear and convincing proof. |
A personal revocatory act requires intent and purpose to revoke (§ 29A-2-507(a)(2)). Complete versus incomplete estate disposition drives replace/supplement presumptions, rebuttable only by clear and convincing evidence (§ 29A-2-507(b)–(d)). The same standard cures a noncompliant written revocation or revival (§ 29A-2-503). Section 29A-2-507 states no missing-original presumption. |
Unless an express governing-instrument term, court order, or marital-estate contract provides otherwise, divorce/annulment revokes revocable dispositions, powers, and fiduciary nominations for the former spouse and qualifying former-spouse relatives (§ 29A-2-804(a)–(b)); separation without ending marital status is not divorce. Revoked provisions use disclaimer/predecease construction and revive on remarriage or nullification (§ 29A-2-804(d)–(e)); other changes do not revoke except under §§ 29A-2-508 and -804. |
If a later will wholly revoked the earlier will and is revoked by act, the earlier will revives only if circumstances or statements show intent. If it only partly revoked the earlier will, the revoked part returns unless the same evidence shows contrary intent. If another later will revokes the revoking will, revival extends only as its terms show (§ 29A-2-509). |
Section 29A-2-509 uses intent-based revival without a separate reexecution/republication requirement. Section 29A-2-503 adds a written harmless-error route: a noncompliant document or writing can constitute partial or complete revival on clear and convincing proof. The statutes state no distinct revoked-codicil restoration presumption; 'will' includes codicil (§ 29A-1-201(52)). |
| Tennessee verified 2026-08-01 | Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 32-1-101(2), 32-1-106(c), and 32-1-201 to -202; 'will' includes codicil, but an oral will cannot revoke or change an existing written will |
Later non-oral will revokes expressly or by inconsistency. A separate express revocation document must satisfy attested- or holographic-will formalities; an oral will is excluded (§§ 32-1-106(c), 32-1-201(1)-(2)). |
With intent and purpose to revoke, burn, tear, cancel, obliterate, or destroy the will or part; the surveyed statute lists no electronic-record-specific act (§ 32-1-201(3)) |
Allowed only in the testator's presence and at the testator's direction; § 32-1-201 states no separate witness-count requirement |
Allowed: the later-will and formal-document routes expressly reach the prior will or part, and the act route applies to a will or any part (§ 32-1-201) |
Physical act requires intent and purpose to revoke. Sections 32-1-201 to -202 state no quantified proof standard, later-will replacement presumption, or missing-original presumption. |
Divorce/annulment revokes former-spouse gifts, appointments, powers, and fiduciary nominations unless the will says otherwise; separation alone does not qualify, and remarriage revives. Both later marriage and birth of a child revoke the will, and later divorce/annulment does not revive it (§§ 32-1-201(4), -202). |
No general statutory revival rule after a later will or revoking act in §§ 32-1-201 to -202. Family-event rules are express: remarriage revives divorce-revoked provisions, but divorce/annulment does not revive a will revoked by later marriage plus a child's birth. |
A codicil is a will and may revoke a prior will or part under § 32-1-201(1). The surveyed statutes state no separate reexecution or republication route for restoring a will revoked by a later instrument or act. |
| Texas verified 2026-08-01 | Tex. Est. Code §§ 123.001–.002, 253.001–.002; written wills, codicils, clauses, and devises |
Later will, codicil, or written declaration executed with like formalities (§ 253.002) |
Testator destroys or cancels the will, clause, or devise; no electronic-specific act stated (§ 253.002) |
Testator may cause destruction or cancellation in the testator's presence; no separate witness count stated (§ 253.002) |
Allowed: statute reaches a written will, clause, or devise, and § 253.001 protects whole-or-part revocation (§§ 253.001–.002) |
Chapter 253 states no separate intent phrase, evidence burden, or missing-will presumption; it lists the exclusive statutory methods (§ 253.002) |
Divorce/annulment/void marriage applies failed-survival treatment to former spouse and specified relatives, with will and trust exceptions (§§ 123.001–.002) |
No express statutory revival rule in current Estates Code; § 123.002 addresses later remarriage only for surviving-spouse status |
Later codicil can revoke under like formalities; no express statutory reexecution, republication, or revoked-codicil restoration rule (§ 253.002) |
| Utah verified 2026-08-01 | Utah Code §§ 75-1-201(67), 75-2-503, 75-2-507 to -509, 75-2-804, and 75-2-1403; 'will' includes codicils and revoking/revising instruments, and ordinary will law applies to electronic wills unless Part 14 modifies it |
Later will revokes expressly or by inconsistency. Complete disposition presumes replacement; incomplete disposition presumes supplementation, each rebuttable by clear and convincing evidence (§ 75-2-507). A defective writing may revoke on clear-and-convincing intent proof (§ 75-2-503). |
Burn, tear, cancel, obliterate, or destroy the will or any part with intent/purpose; burn, tear, or cancellation need not touch words (§ 75-2-507). The same rule applies to electronic wills through § 75-2-1403 unless Part 14 modifies it. |
Allowed in the testator's conscious presence and by the testator's direction; §§ 75-2-507 and 75-2-1403 state no separate witness count for the directed act |
Yes. A later will or a revocatory act may revoke any part; § 75-2-503 also validates an intended partial revocation or alteration on clear-and-convincing proof (§§ 75-2-503, -507). |
Act requires intent and purpose. Complete later will presumes replacement; incomplete later will presumes supplementation, rebuttable by clear and convincing evidence. Harmless-error revocation/alteration/revival also needs clear-and-convincing intent proof (§§ 75-2-503, -507). |
Divorce/annulment revokes revocable gifts, powers, and fiduciary nominations for former spouse and qualifying relatives, subject to instrument/order/contract exceptions; separation alone is not divorce, remarriage/nullification revives, and no other circumstance change revokes (§§ 75-2-508, -804). |
If later will wholly revoked earlier and is revoked by act, earlier remains revoked unless circumstances/declarations show revival intent. If later will partly revoked earlier and is revoked by act, the revoked part revives unless contrary intent appears. Revocation by a third will revives only to intent shown in that will (§ 75-2-509). |
A formal or harmless-error writing may show revival, and a later will can expressly restore as its terms show (§§ 75-2-503, -509). Because 'will' includes codicils, § 75-2-509's whole/partial later-will rules also cover codicil effects; possession alone is not enough. |
| Vermont verified 2026-08-01 | 14 V.S.A. § 11 (revocation) and § 320 (divorce), with execution formalities in § 5. Chapter 1 of Title 14 runs §§ 1-11 and ends at the revocation section. The wills chapters use the word 'will' throughout and contain no codicil-specific provision, no electronic-will statute, and no revival or republication section. |
A will is revoked 'by executing a subsequent will that revokes the previous will expressly or by inconsistency' (§ 11(a)(1)(A)). That is the only instrument route named — Vermont provides no separate non-will revocation writing — so a document whose purpose is to revoke must satisfy § 5: in writing, signed in the presence of two or more credible witnesses by the testator or by another at the testator's express direction and in the testator's presence, and attested and subscribed by the witnesses in the presence of the testator and each other. |
A 'revocatory act on the will' performed 'with the intent and for the purpose of revoking the will or part' (§ 11(a)(1)(B)). The defined list is burning, tearing, canceling, obliterating, or destroying the will or any part of it, and 'a burning, tearing, or canceling is a revocatory act on the will, whether or not the burn, tear, or cancellation touched any of the words on the will' (§ 11(a)(2)). No deletion, electronic-record, or signature-specific route is stated. |
Permitted where another individual 'performed the act in the testator's conscious presence and by the testator's direction' (§ 11(a)(1)(B)). Conscious presence, not physical line of sight, is the statutory test. No witness count, writing, or separate proof requirement applies to the directed act. |
Allowed by both routes. The act route reaches 'the will or part' and 'the will or any part of it' (§ 11(a)(1)(B), (a)(2)). The instrument route reaches a part through § 11(c): where the later will does not dispose of the whole estate, it revokes the earlier will 'only to the extent the subsequent will is inconsistent,' and both wills stay operative where they are not. |
Revocatory intent is required for the act route. Vermont's distinctive feature is a pair of statutory presumptions about later wills, each rebuttable only 'by clear and convincing evidence': a subsequent will making a complete disposition of the estate is presumed to REPLACE the earlier will, which is then revoked entirely (§ 11(b)); a subsequent will not making a complete disposition is presumed to SUPPLEMENT it, revoking only to the extent of inconsistency (§ 11(c)). The statute creates no presumption of revocation from a missing or mutilated original. |
A final divorce or dissolution order 'from any state' nullifies a gift by will to an individual who was the decedent's spouse when the will was executed, and any nomination of that spouse as executor, executrix, trustee, guardian, or other fiduciary, if the decedent was no longer married to or in a civil union with that individual at death, unless the will specifically states the contrary (§ 320). Civil unions are covered alongside marriage. The section does not reach the former spouse's relatives, does not sever joint tenancies, and states no remarriage-revival rule. Marriage, birth, and adoption do not revoke a will; a child born after the will instead takes an intestate share unless the will shows a contrary intent (§ 332). |
No revival statute. Vermont's wills chapter (14 V.S.A. §§ 1-11) and its probate-and-construction chapter (§§ 101-118) contain no provision on whether revoking a later will restores an earlier one, and neither chapter uses the words revive, revival, or republish anywhere. Vermont adopted the Uniform Probate Code's revocation section but not its companion revival section. |
No reexecution, republication, or codicil-effect statute. Nothing in Title 14 says that revoking a codicil restores what it changed or that a later instrument republishes an earlier one. A restoring instrument must be executed as a will under § 5, and no Vermont will is effective until allowed in the Probate Division (§ 101). |
| Virginia verified 2026-08-01 | Va. Code §§ 64.2-404, -410–-413; international wills use ordinary revocation rules (§ 64.2-439) |
Express revocation by later will or will-formal writing; formal later will/codicil revokes part or by inconsistency if effective at death (§§ 64.2-404, -410) |
Cut, tear, burn, obliterate, cancel, or destroy will/codicil, signature, or provision with intent; no electronic act stated (§ 64.2-410(A)) |
Allowed at testator's direction and in testator's presence; no separate witness count stated (§ 64.2-410(A)) |
Physical act may target a provision; later formal instrument may expressly revoke part or revoke to extent of inconsistency (§§ 64.2-404, -410) |
Intent required; § 64.2-404 needs clear-and-convincing proof, usually cannot excuse signature, and requires circuit-court filing within one year |
Bond divorce/annulment revokes former-spouse gifts and usually powers/offices; remarriage revival has no-intervening-instrument conditions; no other change revokes (§ 64.2-412) |
No automatic revival: reexecution required and revival reaches only shown intent; § 64.2-404 and remarriage rule are specific routes (§§ 64.2-404, -411–-412) |
Reexecute revoked will/codicil with required formalities; § 64.2-404 may treat qualifying writing as compliant; later effective codicil may revoke (§§ 64.2-404, -410–-411) |
| Washington verified 2026-08-01 | RCW §§ 11.02.005, 11.12.040, .051, .060, .080, and .420; wills, codicils, and electronic wills |
Later will revokes expressly or by inconsistency; a codicil is a will that modifies or partially revokes an earlier will (§§ 11.02.005, 11.12.040) |
Burn, tear, cancel, obliterate, destroy, or another physical act with revocatory intent; no separate electronic deletion act stated (§§ 11.12.040, .420) |
Allowed in testator's presence and by testator's direction; direction and injury/destruction must be proved by two witnesses (§ 11.12.040) |
Allowed: opening rule covers any part, and a later will may partially revoke expressly or by inconsistency (§ 11.12.040) |
Physical act requires intent and purpose; directed act has two-witness proof; revival evidence includes writing, circumstances, and declarations (§§ 11.12.040, .080) |
Dissolution, invalidation, or termination revokes former spouse/partner provisions unless will says otherwise; remarriage/reregistration revives (§ 11.12.051) |
Whole later will: no revival absent intent; revoked codicil: prior will or part revives unless contrary intent (§ 11.12.080) |
No separate reexecution-only formula stated; revival turns on intent evidence, and whole-will revocation ordinarily revokes codicils (§§ 11.12.040, .080) |
| West Virginia verified 2026-08-01 | W. Va. Code §§ 41-1-6 through -10; wills, codicils, whole/partial revocation, divorce effects, strict revival, and timing after reexecution/republication. The article states no separate electronic-will or electronic-revocation rule. |
A later will or codicil may revoke. A separate writing may also revoke if it declares the intention to revoke and is executed in the same manner required for a will (§ 41-1-7). The statute states no inconsistency formula, so an informal note or unexecuted declaration is not the statutory writing route. |
Cut, tear, burn, obliterate, cancel, or destroy the will, codicil, any part, or the signature, with intent to revoke (§ 41-1-7). No deletion or other electronic-record act is stated. |
Allowed only in the testator's presence and at the testator's direction, with revocatory intent (§ 41-1-7). The revocation section states no separate witness count for the directed act. |
Expressly allowed by every route: § 41-1-7 applies to a will or codicil 'or any part thereof,' and physical revocation may target the instrument, part, or signature. |
The listed physical act must be done 'with the intent to revoke.' Sections 41-1-6 through -10 state no quantified proof standard, later-will replacement presumption, or missing-original presumption. A later conveyance does not prevent the will from operating on the interest still disposable at death unless it is itself a statutory revoking act (§ 41-1-9). |
Unless the will expressly provides otherwise, divorce or annulment revokes former-spouse property dispositions/appointments, general or special powers, and nominations as executor, trustee, conservator, or guardian; the will operates as if the former spouse failed to survive (§ 41-1-6). Remarriage revives provisions revoked solely by that section. Non-status separation is not divorce, and no other change of circumstances revokes. The rule applies to events effective after June 5, 1992. |
No automatic revival after any revocation. A revoked will, codicil, or part may be revived only by reexecution or by a codicil executed with will formalities, and only to the extent an intention to revive is shown (§ 41-1-8). |
Reexecute the revoked instrument or execute a qualifying revival codicil (§ 41-1-8). A will reexecuted, republished, or revived by codicil is deemed made at that later time (§ 41-1-10). The statutes state no default that merely revoking a codicil restores provisions it changed. |
| Wisconsin verified 2026-08-01 | Wis. Stat. §§ 851.31, 853.11, 853.12, and 854.15; 'will' includes a codicil, excludes an unproved copy, and § 853.11 makes its listed methods exclusive |
A later will complying with § 853.03 or § 853.05 revokes all/part expressly or by inconsistency. Complete disposition presumes replacement; incomplete disposition presumes supplementation, each rebuttable only by clear and convincing evidence (§ 853.11(1)). |
Burning, tearing, canceling, obliterating, or destroying the will or part with intent revokes (§ 853.11(1m)). No separate electronic-record deletion route appears; an unproved copy is not a will (§ 851.31). |
Allowed only when the person acts in the testator's conscious presence and at the testator's direction; § 853.11 states no separate witness-count or quantified proof requirement for the act |
Allowed by both routes: a later compliant will may revoke a prior will or part, and a physical act may target the will or part (§ 853.11(1), (1m)) |
Physical revocation requires intent. A later complete-disposition will presumptively replaces; an incomplete-disposition will presumptively supplements, with clear-and-convincing rebuttal. The statute states no missing-original revocation presumption (§§ 851.31, 853.11). |
Divorce, annulment, or a similar event revokes revocable gifts, powers, and fiduciary nominations for the former spouse and qualifying relatives, subject to express-instrument, contract, contrary-intent, and remarriage/new-partnership exceptions (§ 854.15). Later marriage does not revoke the premarital will; § 853.12 instead supplies a spouse/partner share subject to exceptions. |
Physical revocation of a later partial-revoking will revives the prior part unless contrary intent appears; physical revocation of a wholly revoking later will leaves the prior will revoked unless revival intent appears. Revocation by a still later will revives only as its terms or contemporary/subsequent declarations show (§ 853.11(6)). |
A codicil is included in 'will' and can operate as the later will. Sections 851.31 and 853.11 state no separate mandatory reexecution/republication route; revival follows § 853.11(6)'s act, instrument-term, circumstance, and declaration rules. |
| Wyoming verified 2026-08-01 | Wyo. Stat. §§ 2-6-117 (revocation) and 2-6-125 (divorce/annulment), within the Wyoming Probate Code. 'Will' includes a codicil and an instrument that merely revokes or revives another will (§ 2-1-301(a)(xxxiv)). No electronic-will or electronic-revocation statute; § 2-6-112(b) addresses only remote witnessing of the original execution. |
A later will revokes the prior will or part 'expressly or by inconsistence' (§ 2-6-117(a)(i)). Both routes are stated. Wyoming names no separate non-testamentary revocation writing: a document that revokes is itself a 'will' under § 2-1-301(a)(xxxiv), so it must be executed as a will (two witnesses under § 2-6-112) or qualify as a holographic will under § 2-6-113. |
Burning, tearing, canceling, obliterating, or destroying the will 'with the intent and for the purpose of revoking it' (§ 2-6-117(a)(ii)). Five listed acts only; the statute names no deletion, electronic-record, or signature-specific target and no electronic route. |
Permitted. The act may be done 'by another person in his presence and by his direction' (§ 2-6-117(a)(ii)). No witness count, writing, or separate proof requirement is stated for the directed act. |
Expressly allowed by both routes: § 2-6-117(a) opens 'A will or any part thereof is revoked.' The Supreme Court has applied the physical route to a partial cancellation, holding the remainder must stand alone as an intelligible testamentary expression and the change must not create a new dispositive scheme (Seeley, 627 P.2d 1357, 1361). |
The physical act requires intent 'and the purpose of revoking'; intent is a question of fact (Seeley at 1362). The code states no clear-and-convincing standard and no presumption from a missing original. Separately, a lost or destroyed will may be probated only if proved to have existed at the testator's death or fraudulently destroyed during life, with its provisions 'clearly and distinctly proved by at least two (2) credible witnesses' (§ 2-6-207(b)). |
Divorce or annulment immediately revokes revocable dispositions, appointments, powers of appointment, and fiduciary nominations for the former spouse AND for the former spouse's relatives, and severs joint tenancies and tenancies by the entirety into tenancies in common (§ 2-6-125(b)). Excepted where the instrument's express terms, a governing law, a court order, or a marital-division contract provide otherwise. Revoked interests are treated as disclaimed; revoked fiduciary nominations as if the person died first (§ 2-6-125(d)). Remarriage to the former spouse revives provisions revoked solely by that section unless a signed prenuptial or other written agreement prohibits revival (§ 2-6-125(e)). 'No change of circumstances other than as described in this section revokes a will' (§ 2-6-125(f)) — marriage, birth, and adoption do not. |
No general revival statute. Chapter 6 of the probate code contains no provision on whether revoking a later will revives an earlier one; the only use of 'revival' in the chapter is the divorce-remarriage rule of § 2-6-125(e). Wyoming's reception statute makes English common law as modified by judicial decisions the rule of decision where not inconsistent with Wyoming law (§ 8-1-101), and no Wyoming Supreme Court decision found in this survey resolves revival of a revoked will. |
No reexecution, republication, or codicil-effect statute. The code states no rule that revoking a codicil restores what the codicil changed and no deemed-date rule for a republished will. A restoring instrument must be executed as a will (§ 2-6-112) or as a holographic will (§ 2-6-113). Seeley used 'republish' descriptively when a partial physical revocation left the rest of a holographic will intact (627 P.2d at 1362), not as a separate statutory route. |
All 51 jurisdictions verified. Each state page shows the statute text and verification date behind its row.
Have a specific situation?
A 50-state comparison shows the landscape. Ask your exact question and see what your state's law says for your facts, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the authority it relies on.