Will Revocation and Revival Requirements in Vermont
At a glance
| Governing law and scope | 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. |
|---|---|
| Later will, codicil, or writing | 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. |
| Physical or electronic revoking act | 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. |
| Act by another person | 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. |
| Partial revocation | 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. |
| Intent, proof, and presumptions | 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. |
| Divorce, annulment, and other family events | 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). |
| Revival after a later will or revoking act | 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. |
| Reexecution, republication, and codicil effect | 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). |
Vermont's revocation section borrows the Uniform Probate Code's language, including two presumptions that do a lot of work when someone leaves more than one will. It did not borrow the companion revival section, so the question of whether destroying a newer will brings back an older one has no statutory answer here.
Requirements one by one
Executing a subsequent will
Section 11(a)(1)(A) revokes a will "by executing a subsequent will that revokes the previous will expressly or by inconsistency." Both routes are on the face of the statute.
Note what is not there: Vermont names no separate revocation writing, no revocation by a signed statement, and no revocation-by-declaration route. The only instrument that revokes is a subsequent will, which means § 5's formalities apply — writing, signature in the presence of two or more credible witnesses (the testator's own or another person's at the testator's express direction and in the testator's presence), and attestation and subscription by the witnesses in the presence of the testator and each other.
The revocatory act
Section 11(a)(1)(B) revokes by "performing a revocatory act on the will," done "with the intent and for the purpose of revoking the will or part."
Subsection (a)(2) defines the act as including burning, tearing, canceling, obliterating, or destroying the will or any part of it — and adds a rule that resolves the most common fight about it:
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.
That sentence means a diagonal line across a blank margin, or a scorch that missed the text, can still be a revocatory act. It cuts both ways: it makes deliberate revocation easier to accomplish and accidental damage more dangerous.
The list is paper-shaped. Vermont has no electronic-will statute and no deletion or record-control route in § 11.
Conscious presence
Another individual may perform the act, but only if they did so "in the testator's conscious presence and by the testator's direction."
Conscious presence is a broader test than physical line of sight — it asks whether the testator was aware of the act through sight, hearing, or general consciousness of events. Both elements are still required: awareness and direction. Someone who destroys a will on their own initiative has revoked nothing.
The two presumptions
This is Vermont's most distinctive rule, and it turns on one question: does the later will dispose of everything?
- Complete disposition → replace. If the subsequent will makes a complete disposition of the estate, the testator is presumed to have intended it to replace the earlier will. Unless that presumption is rebutted by clear and convincing evidence, "the previous will is revoked and only the subsequent will is operative." § 11(b).
- Incomplete disposition → supplement. If the subsequent will does not make a complete disposition, the testator is presumed to have intended it to supplement. Unless rebutted by clear and convincing evidence, it "revokes the previous will only to the extent the subsequent will is inconsistent," and both wills are "fully operative on the testator's death to the extent they are not inconsistent." § 11(c).
Clear and convincing evidence is a demanding standard — higher than the ordinary more-likely-than-not test. In practice the presumption usually decides the case.
Partial revocation
Both routes reach a part. The act route says so twice, at § 11(a)(1)(B) ("the will or part") and § 11(a)(2) ("the will or any part of it"). The instrument route reaches a part through the § 11(c) supplement presumption, which leaves the earlier will operative except where the two conflict.
Divorce and dissolution
Section 320 nullifies two things when a final divorce or dissolution order exists: a gift by will to the individual who was the decedent's spouse when the will was executed, and any nomination of that person as executor, executrix, trustee, guardian, or other fiduciary.
Three features are worth reading closely. The order may come "from any state," so an out-of-state divorce triggers it. The status test runs to the date of death — the section applies if the decedent "was no longer married to or in a civil union with that individual at the time of death," which covers Vermont civil unions alongside marriage. And the escape hatch is narrow: the will must "specifically state to the contrary."
What § 320 does not do matters as much. It does not reach gifts to the former spouse's relatives. It does not sever joint tenancies or tenancies by the entirety. And it contains no rule restoring the nullified gifts if the couple remarries.
Other family changes
Marriage, birth, and adoption do not revoke a Vermont will. A child born after the will who is not provided for instead takes the same share as if the testator had died intestate, "unless it is apparent from the will that it was the intention of the testator that provision should not be made for the child" (§ 332). That is a separate right against the estate, not a revocation of the will.
What trips people up
- Vermont has no revival statute. Chapter 1 of Title 14 ends at § 11 and Chapter 3 ends at § 118, and neither uses the word revive, revival, or republish anywhere. Vermont took the Uniform Probate Code's revocation section without its companion revival section, so nothing tells you in advance whether tearing up a 2024 will restores a 2019 one. If you want the older document to govern, execute a new will saying so; do not rely on destroying the newer one.
- A tear that misses the words still counts. Section 11(a)(2) says burning, tearing, and canceling are revocatory acts whether or not they touched any of the text. Storing a will loosely, or "just marking" a copy you believe is a duplicate, carries real risk.
- Whether your new will is "complete" decides what happens to the old one. A new will with a residuary clause disposing of everything triggers the replace presumption. A codicil-style document handling only one asset triggers the supplement presumption and leaves the old will alive alongside it.
- There is no separate revocation letter route. Because § 11 names only a subsequent will, a signed statement revoking your will has to meet § 5's two-witness formalities to do anything.
- Divorce does not reach your ex's family or your joint accounts. Section 320 covers gifts and fiduciary nominations to the former spouse only.
- A will has no effect until it is allowed. Section 101 requires allowance in the Probate Division, and § 106(a) obliges anyone holding a will to deliver it promptly on an interested person's request, on pain of civil contempt.
Common questions
I made a new will but never said anything about the old one. Is the old one gone?
Probably, if the new one disposes of your whole estate — that triggers the § 11(b) replace presumption, and rebutting it takes clear and convincing evidence. If the new document only handles a few items, § 11(c) instead presumes it supplements, and the old will stays operative wherever the two do not conflict.
Can my spouse or child tear up my will for me?
Only in your conscious presence and at your direction. Both conditions have to hold. Without them the act does not revoke anything, however clear your wishes were.
Does a divorce in another state affect my Vermont will?
Yes. Section 320 applies to a final divorce or dissolution order "from any state," and it also covers the dissolution of a civil union.
If I remarry my former spouse, do the nullified gifts come back?
Section 320 says nothing about remarriage, and Vermont has no revival statute to supply an answer. The safe course is to execute a new will rather than assume the old gifts revive.
Statutes and sources
- 14 V.S.A. § 11 — the two revocation routes, the defined revocatory acts, the touched-no-words rule, the conscious-presence directed act, and the replace/supplement presumptions with their clear-and-convincing rebuttal standard. Official Chapter 1 text (accessed 2026-08-01).
- 14 V.S.A. § 320 — divorce or dissolution from any state nullifying a former spouse's gift and fiduciary nominations, the civil-union coverage, the date-of-death status test, and the specific-statement exception. Official section text (accessed 2026-08-01).
- 14 V.S.A. § 5 — execution formalities that any revoking or restoring instrument must meet. Official Chapter 1 text (accessed 2026-08-01).
- 14 V.S.A. § 332 — afterborn child's intestate share, the separate route Vermont uses instead of revocation on birth. Official section text (accessed 2026-08-01).
- 14 V.S.A. §§ 101 and 106 — allowance requirement and the custodian's duty to deliver. Official Chapter 3 text (accessed 2026-08-01).
Source links
Every statute quoted above, linked, with the date we checked it.
What does Vermont law mean for your facts?
You just read the general rule. Ask your own question and see which parts of current Vermont law apply to your situation, with citations you can check.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Starts from the statutes this survey is built on
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace