K.S.A. » Chapter 59
Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 59-611 (2026)

Manner of revocation

✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KS-LEGkslegislature.org JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

59-611. 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, § 47; July 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1985–2017 · leading case: In re the Est. of Mettee, 694 P.2d 1325 (Kan. Ct. App. 1985).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In re the Est. of Mettee, 694 P.2d 1325 (Kan. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 2× “” *187 Appellant next contends (following his reasoning that the common law is not applicable) that a will can be revoked only by the means stated in K.S.A. 59-611. This argument lacks merit.”
In re the Est. of Sanders, 929 P.2d 153 (Kan. 1996). “Patricia’s argument that wills and inter vivos trusts are essentially the same would have us rewrite K.S.A. 59-611 to add the emphasized language: “No will or will substitute in writing shall be revoked or altered otherwise than by some other will in writing; or by some other…”
Bell v. Brittain, 880 P.2d 289 (Kan. Ct. App. 1994). “However, it is unknown whether the Howertons had any former will, and even if they did, the execution of the 1985 will would have automatically revoked any prior wills under K.S.A. 59-611. Therefore, this factor is of little importance.”
In re the Est. of Mettee, 702 P.2d 1381 (Kan. 1985). “For the reasons stated by the Court of Appeals in its opinion, we conclude that the rule is still applicable in this state, that it has not been revoked by K.S.A. 59-611 or 59-2228, and that if is applicable in cases where two or more duplicate copies of a will are executed with…”
In re the Est. of Rickabaugh, 358 P.3d 859 (Kan. Ct. App. 2015). “But Beu-ford never signed them and seemingly demonstrated no great urge *909 to do so, suggesting some ambivalence about the changes and continued satisfaction with the 1992 will.”
In re Est. of Rickabaugh, No. 111389 (Kan. Mar. 3, 2017). · cites it 2× “Everett urges this court to reverse the district court's conclusion that "the evidence fails to prove that Beuford Rickabaugh revoked his 1992 will by any of the methods set out in K.S.A. 59-611." K.S.A. 59-611 sets out the mechanics for revoking a written will: "Except as…”
In re Est. of Rickabaugh, No. 111389 (Kan. Ct. App. Sept. 11, 2015). “She then prepared at least a couple of revised versions over the next several years.”
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.