Brief Fact Summary. Lou Bown Kroll attempted to revoke a will and codicil by directing another person to revoke the will by writing on a separate sheet of paper. Kroll signed the documents attempting to revoke the will and codicil. The trial court admitted the documents to probate and Kroll’s heirs at law appeal the verdict.
Synopsis of Rule of Law. To revoke a will other than by creating another duly executed will, the first will must be destroyed by a cutting, tearing, burning, obliterating, or destroying the will. If it is revoked by words that do not quality themselves as a validly executed will, those words must physically come into contact with the words of the will.
Whether a will or codicil is revoked where the testator directs another to write words on a sheet of paper attached to the will or codicil, if the words do not physically come into contact with the words creating the will.
Whether a will or codicil is revoked where the testator directs another to write words on a sheet of paper that is attached to the will or codicil, but signs the document herself.
No. A will or codicil is not revoked where the testator attaches a paper to a will writing “this will null and void” because it was not executed the way a will is required to be executed.
No. The will was not revoked because the words “this will null and void” did physically come into contact with the words of the original will, even though the testator wrote words on a separate paper attached to the will that declared the will null and void. Furthermore, the words themselves did not constitute a validly executed will.
As is pointed out in Thompson v. Royall revocation of a will by cancellation within the meaning of the statute, contemplates marks or lines across the written parts of the instrument, or a physical defacement, or some mutilation of the writing itself, with the intent to revoke.View Full Point of Law