ALTERED WILL
Feb 21, 2015OUTCOME: PROBATED ORIGINAL WILL
The Supplement is meant to address the application of California Probate Code § 6120(b) and § 6124. The Petitioner contends that the removal or page 2 of the will amounted to a revocation of the will, ... in part, that the altered second page did not meet the requirements of being a testamentary instrument, and that the doctrine of dependent relative revocation calls on us to rely on the original, unaltered will. Petitioner requests that the Court admit the UNALTERED ORIGINAL WILL into probate for administration. California Probate Code (CPC) § 6120 defines the following acts as constituting revocation of a will or any part thereof: 1) a subsequent will which revokes the prior will (or part) expressly or by inconsistency, or 2) the will being burned, torn, cancelled, obliterated, or destroyed with the intent and for the purposes of revoking it by either the testator or another person in the testator's presence and by the testator's direction. CPC § 6124 gives us a presumption that the Testator destroyed page 2 of the will with the intent to revoke that part of the will since the will was last in the testator's possession, the testator was competent until death, and neither the original page 2 of the will nor a duplicate original of the will can be found after the testator's death. It is the Petitioner’s position that the Testator intended to revoke her will, in part, by replacing the second page, and that the original page two has been destroyed (CPC § 6120b & CPC § 6124). The Testator also attempted to amend her will by substituting an altered second page. The alteration replaced one beneficiary with another, AAAA in place of BBBB, with regard to a diamond wedding ring and a wedding band. The other change revoked a bequest of a sapphire and diamond ring to CCCC. It is the Petitioner’s position that the attempt to amend the second page of the will was invalid according to CPC § 6110 and § 6111. There were no witnesses (CPC § 6110), and the material provisions are in not the handwriting of the Testator (CPC § 6111). Application of the doctrine of dependent relative revocation would mean that the original, unaltered will is to be relied on for administration. Rather than having no page 2 of the will in effect at the time of the testator's death, dependent relative revocation would alleviate the harshness of the consequences of the testator's mistake. In other words, if a testator revokes his or her will, or a portion thereof, in the mistaken belief that a substantially identical will or codicil effectuates her intent, then by operation of law the revocation of the first will be deemed conditional, dependent, and relative to the second effectuating the testator's intent. If the second does not effectuate the testator's intent, the first (by pure legal fiction) was never revoked. (CPC § 6123) Petitioner requests that the Court admit the UNALTERED ORIGINAL WILL into probate for administration. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing and attachments, if any, are true and correct.
