Self-Proving Affidavit for Wills Requirements in California

At a glance

What California does instead

California is one of the jurisdictions that never adopted the Uniform Probate Code's self-proving affidavit, and the absence is complete rather than partial. The Probate Code's table of contents runs to 564 chapter and article headings; none of them creates a self-proof mechanism, and the Execution of Wills chapter (§§ 6110–6113) says nothing about notarization at all. There is no form to sign at a will signing, no officer's certificate, and no seal, because there is nothing for them to attach to.

That is not the same as saying a California family must drag witnesses into court. The shortcut exists — it just arrives at the other end of the process, and it is built for the executor rather than for the testator.

The uncontested-will route. Probate Code § 8220 opens with the condition that governs everything else in this area: "Unless there is a contest of a will." Where no contest is pending, the will "may be proved on the evidence of one of the subscribing witnesses only" — one witness, not both — provided that evidence shows the will "was executed in all particulars as prescribed by law." Those particulars are the § 6110 formalities: a writing, signed by the testator or in the testator's name at the testator's direction, witnessed by two people who were present at the same time and who understood the instrument was the testator's will.

And that evidence can be on paper. Section 8220(b) is what makes this a practical substitute for live testimony. Evidence of execution "may be received by an affidavit of a subscribing witness to which there is attached a photographic copy of the will, or by an affidavit in the original will that includes or incorporates the attestation clause." The second alternative is the one that looks most like a self-proving affidavit, and it is worth being precise about the difference: it is an affidavit in the will that incorporates the attestation clause, filed as evidence when the will is offered for probate. It is not something the statute contemplates being sworn at the signing, and no California statute gives such a document advance effect.

When the witnesses are gone. Section 8221 covers the case where no subscribing witness is "available as a witness within the meaning of Section 240 of the Evidence Code." If the will on its face conforms to all requirements of law, the court may permit proof by the testator's handwriting plus one of: proof of the handwriting of any one subscribing witness; a writing in the will bearing the signatures of all subscribing witnesses; or an affidavit of a person with personal knowledge of the circumstances of the execution.

Out-of-county witnesses. Section 8220(c) allows the court to direct a deposition where no subscribing witness resides in the county, and to authorize a photographic copy of the will to be presented to the witness in place of the original.

Handwritten wills. A holographic will has no subscribing witnesses to begin with, so § 8222 sends it down a different path: it "may be proved in the same manner as other writings" — ordinarily by evidence of the testator's handwriting.

What trips people up

A notarized California will is not a self-proved California will, and notarizing it does nothing for validity either. Section 6110 requires two witnesses who were present at the same time. A notary is not a witness. Adding a notary block to a California will neither satisfies § 6110 nor triggers any statutory proof shortcut, because no such shortcut exists to trigger. Where notarization can matter is practical, not statutory: it may make it easier to locate and identify the people who signed years later.

"Self-proving" clauses in California will forms are widely used and are not what they sound like. Many California will packages include an article headed "self-proving attestation clause," typically a declaration under penalty of perjury rather than an affidavit. Nothing in the Probate Code gives such a clause advance self-proving effect. At probate the document will be evaluated as evidence under § 8220 like any other. Using one is not a mistake; treating it as though the will has been pre-proved is.

The shortcut disappears the moment someone contests. The "unless there is a contest" opening of § 8220 is a condition on the whole section, including the affidavit route in subdivision (b). A contest returns the proponent to ordinary proof of execution.

The affidavit proves execution and nothing more. Section 8220 asks whether the will "was executed in all particulars as prescribed by law." Testamentary capacity and freedom from undue influence are separate questions, litigated separately — and § 8224 exists precisely because testimony about capacity and other issues of fact may need to be preserved for a later proceeding.

Do not plan on an electronic California will. The Probate Code has no electronic-wills chapter and no remote-witnessing or online-notarization provision. Section 6110 requires a signed writing witnessed by two people present at the same time.

Common questions

My out-of-state will has a self-proving affidavit and I have moved to California. Is it wasted? Not wasted, but it carries no special California status. California has no counterpart to the recognition provisions some states use to import another state's self-proof. What the affidavit gives you in California is practical: a signed, sworn record of who the witnesses were and what happened at the signing, which is useful evidence under § 8220 or § 8221 when the time comes.

Can my witnesses sign something at the will signing that will help later? Yes, and it is worth doing even though it is not "self-proving." A complete attestation clause in the will, with the witnesses' full names, addresses, and the date, is what § 8220(b) contemplates being incorporated into an affidavit, and it is what makes a witness findable in twenty years. Keep the addresses current with the will.

Does only one witness really have to be found? Under § 8220(a), yes, in an uncontested case — the will "may be proved on the evidence of one of the subscribing witnesses only." Both must still have signed at execution; the reduction is to what must be proved later, not to what § 6110 requires at signing.

What if a formality was missed? That is a different statute with a different answer. Section 6110(c)(2) lets a will be treated as properly witnessed if the proponent establishes by clear and convincing evidence that the testator intended the document as their will. That harmless-error route is about validity; §§ 8220–8221 are about proof.

Statutes and sources

All California statutory text below was taken from the Legislative Counsel's official bulk publication of the California codes at https://downloads.leginfo.legislature.ca.gov (file pubinfo_2025.zip), the same data that drives the state's official code site. Each section's row in that publication carries its operative amendment history, reproduced here.

• Cal. Prob. Code § 8220 (proof of an uncontested will by one subscribing witness; affidavit with photographic copy or affidavit in the will; deposition of an out-of-county witness) — Enacted by Stats. 1990, Ch. 79. (accessed 2026-08-01)
• Cal. Prob. Code § 8221 (proof where no subscribing witness is available) — Enacted by Stats. 1990, Ch. 79. (accessed 2026-08-01)
• Cal. Prob. Code § 8222 (holographic will proved as other writings) — Enacted by Stats. 1990, Ch. 79. (accessed 2026-08-01)
• Cal. Prob. Code § 8224 (preservation of witness testimony for later proceedings) — Enacted by Stats. 1990, Ch. 79. (accessed 2026-08-01)
• Cal. Prob. Code § 8226 (conclusiveness of admission to probate absent a contest) — Amended by Stats. 1997, Ch. 724, Sec. 19. (accessed 2026-08-01)
• Cal. Prob. Code § 6110 (execution of wills; two witnesses present at the same time; harmless-error rule) — Amended by Stats. 2008, Ch. 53, Sec. 1, effective January 1, 2009. (accessed 2026-08-01)

The finding that California has no self-proving affidavit rests on the Probate Code's own official table of contents in that publication: its 564 chapter and article headings contain no self-proof provision, and no electronic-will or remote-witnessing chapter. The 2025–2026 legislative session was checked for amendments affecting the proof-of-will article; none was found.