1. Effective date. This probate code shall take effect and be in force on and after January 1, 1964. The procedure herein prescribed shall govern all proceedings in probate brought after the effective date of this probate code. It shall also govern further procedure in proceedings in probate then pending, except to the extent that, in the opinion of the court, its application in particular proceedings or parts thereof would not be feasible or would work injustice, in which event the former procedure shall apply.
2. Rights not affected. No act done in any proceeding commenced before this probate code takes effect and no accrued or vested right shall be impaired by its provisions. When a right has been acquired, extinguished, or barred upon the expiration of a prescribed period of time governed by the provision of any statute in force before this probate code takes effect, such provision shall remain in force and be deemed a part of this probate code with respect to such right. [C66, 71, 73, 75, 77, 79, 81, §633.2] 2005 Acts, ch 38, §51 \n Tue Dec 09 21:59:20 2025 Iowa Code 2026, Chapter 633 (154, 4) 11 PROBATE CODE, §633.3\n\n PART 2 DEFINITIONS AND USE OF TERMS \n
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
16
cases, 1950–2004 · leading case:
Sawyer v. Sawyer, 152 N.W.2d 605 (Iowa 1967).
Sawyer v. Sawyer, 152 N.W.2d 605 (Iowa 1967).
· cites it 6× “Code section 633.2, subsection 1. However, section 633.”
Morris v. Morris, 383 N.W.2d 527 (Iowa 1986).
· cites it 4× “This provision became effective in 1964 and defendants contend it does not apply to the Morris wills which were executed in 1957.”
In Re Est. of Graham, 690 N.W.2d 66 (Iowa 2004).
· cites it 2× “2d at 412-14 ; see Iowa Code § 633.2 (2) (enactment of probate code shall not impair any “accrued or vested right”).”
O'KELLEY v. Lochner, 145 N.W.2d 626 (Iowa 1966).
· cites it 4× “See section 633.2(2), Code of 1966. We are not dealing with a case pending at the time of death of defendant’s decedent.”
In Re Artz'Est., 120 N.W.2d 418 (Iowa 1963).
· cites it 2× “Appellant contends, with merit, that this instrument cannot be both clear and ambiguous, that under the Hartman and Nolte eases if it (the will and codicil read together) does not, in sufficiently clear and explicit terms, indicate a contrary intention, the provisions made for…”
Nolte v. Nolte, 76 N.W.2d 881 (Iowa 1956).
· cites it 2× “Section 633.2, Code of Iowa 1954, says: “Where the survivor is named as a devisee in a will, it shall be presumed, unless the intention is clear and explicit to the contrary, that such devise is in lieu of such distributive share, homestead, and exemptions.”
Matter of Campbell, 319 N.W.2d 275 (Iowa 1982).
“§ 633.2. Usually the more beneficial alternative for the surviving spouse is plain, as where the testator had no debts and the will gives the spouse half of the property outright, as contrasted to a third under the statute.”
Sefcik v. Sheker, 41 N.W.2d 709 (Iowa 1950).
“The question is one of fact — did the widow “consent” to the terms of her husband’s will which were, under the terms of the statute, “presumed” to be in lieu of dower? Sections 633.2 and 636.21, Code of 1946. Unfortunately the answer is not as clear either way as the optimism of…”
Westergard v. Klepper, 229 N.W.2d 236 (Iowa 1975).
· cites it 2× “Code 1975, § 633.2. Subsection 2 of § 633.2 provides: No act done in any proceeding commenced before this Code takes effect and no accrued or vested right shall be impaired by its provisions.”
Matter of Est. of Duhme, 267 N.W.2d 688 (Iowa 1978).
· cites it 2× “§ 633.2(1); 79 Am.Jur.2d, Wills, §§ 197, 823; 95 C.”
— Iowa Code § 633.2(1) — 3 cases
Morris v. Morris, 383 N.W.2d 527 (Iowa 1986).
“This provision became effective in 1964 and defendants contend it does not apply to the Morris wills which were executed in 1957.”
— Iowa Code § 633.2(2) — 2 cases
O'KELLEY v. Lochner, 145 N.W.2d 626 (Iowa 1966).
“See section 633.2(2), Code of 1966. We are not dealing with a case pending at the time of death of defendant’s decedent.”
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.