Printable Format59-611. Manner of revocation. Except as provided in K.S.A. 59-610, no will in writing shall be revoked or altered otherwise than by some other will in writing; or by some other writing of the testator declaring such revocation or alteration and executed with the same formalities with which the will itself was required by law to be executed; or unless such will be burnt, torn, canceled, obliterated or destroyed, with the intent and for the purpose of revoking the same, by the testator himself or herself or by another person in the testator's presence by his or her direction.
History: L. 1939, ch. 180, ยง 47; July 1.
Source or prior law:
22-241.
Law Review and Bar Journal References:
Provisions of this section similar to those under proposed Uniform Probate Code, Camilla Klein Haviland, 19 K.L.R. 575, 579 (1971).
"Survey of Kansas Law: Wills, Trusts, and Probate," Richard C. Harris, 27 K.L.R. 365, 376 (1979).
"Contracts to Will: An Estate Planning Alternative for the Kansas Practitioner," Kevin J. Arnel, Steven J. Wood, 26 W.L.J. 444, 454 (1987).
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Nuncupative will cannot revoke or alter prior written will. In re Estate of Grattan, 157 Kan. 116, 119, 123, 124, 138 P.2d 497.
2. Section is mandatory; must be strictly pursued to effect revocation; intent; mental capacity; cancellation or obliteration; presumption of revocation; evidence. In re Estate of Kemper, 157 Kan. 727, 734, 145 P.2d 103.
3. Section mandatory; will revocable only as herein provided; marginal writing not revocation. In re Estate of Rinker, 158 Kan. 406, 407, 410, 412, 415, 416, 147 P.2d 740.
4. Oral testimony cannot nullify existing written will. In re Estate of Koellen, 162 Kan. 395, 396, 403, 176 P.2d 544.
5. Will with obliterated paragraph; effect; when admitted to probate. In re Estate of Johannes, 170 Kan. 407, 410, 411, 227 P.2d 148.
6. Section mandatory; no partial revocation; presumption; evidence; burden of proof; will with pencil markings through beneficiaries' names admitted to probate in original form. In re Estate of Grisell, 176 Kan. 209, 212, 270 P.2d 285.
7. Burning of will considered sufficient proof of revocation. In re Estate of Kafka, 180 Kan. 77, 79, 299 P.2d 77.
8. Mentioned; failure of codicil to mention prior codicil; no revocation effected. In re Estate of Heilig, 211 Kan. 608, 609, 506 P.2d 1147.
9. Statute no bar to application of doctrine of ademption by satisfaction. Baker University v. K.S.C. of Pittsburg, 222 Kan. 245, 252, 253, 564 P.2d 472.
10. Common-law presumption of revocation recognized in Kansas; not inconsistent herewith. In re Estate of Mettee, 10 Kan. App. 2d 184, 187, 694 P.2d 1325 (1985).
11. Cited; where executed copy of will retained by testator but cannot be found after death, rebuttable presumption of revocation arises. In re Estate of Mettee, 237 Kan. 652, 702 P.2d 1381 (1985).
12. Cited in discussion of factors determining whether decedent's will is contractual. Bell v. Brittain, 19 Kan. App. 2d 1073, 1078, 880 P.2d 289 (1994).
13. Will which did not refer to preexisting inter vivos trust did not revoke trust. In re Estate of Sanders, 261 Kan. 176, 189, 929 P.2d 153 (1996).