Alaska Statutes
Alaska Stat. § 13.16.170 (2026)
Formal testacy proceedings; burdens in contested cases
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
AK-LEGakleg.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 13.16.170. Formal testacy proceedings; burdens in contested cases.
In contested cases, petitioners who seek to establish intestacy have the burden of establishing prima facie proof of death, venue, and heirship. Proponents of a will have the burden of establishing prima facie proof of due execution in all cases, and if they are also petitioners, prima facie proof of death and venue. Contestants of a will have the burden of establishing lack of testamentary intent or capacity, undue influence, fraud, duress, mistake, or revocation. Parties have the ultimate burden of persuasion as to matters with respect to which they have the initial burden of proof. If a will is opposed by the petition for probate of a later will revoking the former, it shall be determined first whether the later will is entitled to probate, and if a will is opposed by a petition for a declaration of intestacy, it shall be determined first whether the will is entitled to probate.
In contested cases, petitioners who seek to establish intestacy have the burden of establishing prima facie proof of death, venue, and heirship. Proponents of a will have the burden of establishing prima facie proof of due execution in all cases, and if they are also petitioners, prima facie proof of death and venue. Contestants of a will have the burden of establishing lack of testamentary intent or capacity, undue influence, fraud, duress, mistake, or revocation. Parties have the ultimate burden of persuasion as to matters with respect to which they have the initial burden of proof. If a will is opposed by the petition for probate of a later will revoking the former, it shall be determined first whether the later will is entitled to probate, and if a will is opposed by a petition for a declaration of intestacy, it shall be determined first whether the will is entitled to probate.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1993–2023 · leading case: Riddell v. Edwards, 32 P.3d 4 (Alaska 2001).
Riddell v. Edwards, 32 P.3d 4 (Alaska 2001). “Under AS 13.16.170 the "[plroponents of a will have the burden of establishing prima facie proof of due execution in all cases, and if they are also petitioners, prima facie proof of death and venue.”
Matter of Est. of McCoy, 844 P.2d 1131 (Alaska 1993). “165(b) and AS 13.16.170 shift the presumption applicable to self-proved wills from a presumption that undue influence exists, to a presumption that no undue influence exists.”
Crittell v. Bingo, 36 P.3d 634 (Alaska 2001). “" The Crittells agreed with this assertion: their reply expressly acknowledged that "[t]he parties agree on the fundamental legal tests and on the burdens of proof in AS 13.16.170 to be applied in this case." In context, then, it hardly seems surprising that Judge Michalski…”
Cannon v. Stonefield, 844 P.2d 1131 (Alaska 1993). “165(b) and AS 13.16.170 shift the presumption applicable to self-proved wills from a presumption that undue influence exists, to a presumption that no undue influence exists.”
In the Matter of the Est. of Janice V. Evensen, 531 P.3d 969 (Alaska 2023). “19 AS 13.16.170. 20 Id. 11 7664 question is whether the “material portions of the document are in [Janice’s] handwriting.”
ITMO: The Est. of v. Offenesia Yako Bavilla (Alaska 2017). “Lack of testamentary capacity Whether an individual had the necessary testamentary capacity to execute a will depends upon “whether the testator had sufficient mental capacity to understand,” among other things, “the nature of her testamentary act.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.