732.505

Revocation by writing.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

732.505 Revocation by writing.—A will or codicil, or any part of either, is revoked:

(1) By a subsequent inconsistent will or codicil, even though the subsequent inconsistent will or codicil does not expressly revoke all previous wills or codicils, but the revocation extends only so far as the inconsistency.

(2) By a subsequent will, codicil, or other writing executed with the same formalities required for the execution of wills declaring the revocation.

History.—s. 1, ch. 74-106; s. 23, ch. 75-220; s. 13, ch. 77-87; s. 269, ch. 79-400; s. 44, ch. 2001-226.

Note.—Created from former ss. 731.12, 731.13.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 9 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1991–2023 · leading case: Gushwa v. Hunt

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Gushwa v. Hunt (2008) nm · cites it 2× “") with Fla. Stat. § 732.505 (2) (2002) ("A will or codicil, or any part of either, is revoked .”

In Re Estate of Dickson (1991) fladistctapp · cites it 4× “505, Florida Statutes (1989), provides a will or codicil or any part of either is revoked by writing: (1) By a subsequent inconsistent will or codicil, even though the subsequent inconsistent will or codicil does not expressly revoke all previous wills or codicils, but the…”

Cioeta v. Estate of Linet (2003) fladistctapp · cites it 4× “In their petition, they asserted that the alleged attempted alteration was invalid under section 732.505, Florida Statutes, and sought their appointment as co-personal representatives.”

Brown v. Brown (2009) alacivapp · cites it 2× “Code 1975, § 43-8-136, with Fla. Stat. § 732.505 (2) (2002) and Ind.Code § 29-1-5-6 (1994 Supp.”

Taft v. Zack (2002) fladistctapp · cites it 2× “Taft, the will was otherwise unmarked in any manner to indicate that the decedent intended to completely revoke the will.”

MARGOT M. CAVEGLIA and CHRISTOPHER CAVEGLIA v. DIANA HEINEN (2023) fladistctapp · cites it 3× “a written revocation cannot be found when not performed in compliance with section 732.505[.]”). This requirement of strict compliance with state law in executing both a will and a revocation instrument is not unusual.”

Bertoglio v. Dickson (1991) fladistctapp “Furthermore, it is generally held that while a written revocation cannot be found when not performed in compliance with section 732.505, where words indicating an intent to revoke are written upon the will and,- in addition to such circumstance there is some other act of…”

Dahly v. Dahly (2004) fladistctapp · cites it 3× “§ 732.505, Fla. Stat. (2002). Section 732.”

In re Estate of Cochran (1994) fladistctapp · cites it 2× “Section 732.505(2), Florida Statutes, identifies the requirements for a written instrument which revokes a prior will.”

— 732.505(2) — 2 cases

MARGOT M. CAVEGLIA and CHRISTOPHER CAVEGLIA v. DIANA HEINEN (2023) fladistctapp “a written revocation cannot be found when not performed in compliance with section 732.505[.]”). This requirement of strict compliance with state law in executing both a will and a revocation instrument is not unusual.”

In re Estate of Cochran (1994) fladistctapp “Section 732.505(2), Florida Statutes, identifies the requirements for a written instrument which revokes a prior will.”

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.