59-618.
Liability and effect of withholding will.
Any person who has possession of the will of a testator dying a resident of this state, or has knowledge of such will and access to it for the purpose of probate, and knowingly withholds it from the district court having jurisdiction to probate it for more than six months after the death of the testator shall be liable for reasonable attorney fees, costs and all damages sustained by beneficiaries under the will who do not have possession of the will and are without knowledge of it and access to it. Such will may be admitted to probate as to any innocent beneficiary on petition for probate by any such beneficiary, if such petition is filed within 90 days after such beneficiary has knowledge of such will and access to it, except that the title of any purchaser in good faith, without knowledge of such will, to any property derived from the fiduciary, heirs, devisees or legatees of the decedent, shall not be defeated by the production of the will of such decedent and the petition for probate of the will after the expiration of six months from the death of the decedent.
The provisions of this section as amended by this act shall apply retroactively to the withholding of a will of a testator.
History:
L. 1939, ch. 180, § 54; L. 1943, ch. 213, § 2; L. 1972, ch. 215, § 2; L. 1976, ch. 242, § 6; L. 1985, ch. 191, § 9; July 1.
Notes of Decisions
In Re the Estate of Strader (2014)
kan · cites it 27×
“A panel of the Court of Appeals affirmed the district court, relying upon its interpretation of K.S.A. 59-618, which is an exception to K.”
In Re the Estate of Strader (2012)
kanctapp · cites it 54×
“" That same day, Eric filed a petition for probate of the will under K.S.A. 59-618 and petitioned for a stay of the property auctions.”
In re the Estate of Tracy (2006)
kanctapp · cites it 9×
“” Shore stated she “had access to the will for less than 90 days,” arguing that it should be admitted pursuant to K.S.A. 59-618. No one disputes Shore’s statement that she had access to the will for less than 90 days.”
In re Estate of Oroke (2019)
kan · cites it 4×
“59-618 provides for an exception to the six-month limitation period when someone who knows where a will is located knowingly withholds it from the court: "Any person who has possession of the will of a testator dying a resident of this state, or has knowledge of such will and…”
In Re Estate of Williams (1986)
kan · cites it 5×
“Farney then filed a petition for instructions relative to the probate of the 1973 will and the 1974 codicil under the provisions of K.S.A. 59-618. Nelle Gilmore filed written defenses in opposition to the petition to probate the lost will and codicil.”
In Re the Estate of Ciochon (1980)
kanctapp · cites it 4×
“The court found that the will severed the joint tenancy feature of property that had been owned jointly by appellant, Ralph Ciochon, and his deceased wife, Elizabeth Ciochon, prior to its execution, and that upon the death of Elizabeth Ciochon all property passed to the…”
In Re Estate of Petty (1980)
kan · cites it 2×
“As noted in Harper, *704 the pertinent statutes, K.S.A. 59-618, 59-620, and 59-621, express the legislative intent that the will of every person shall be offered for probate and that there is a clear public policy in establishing every legally executed will.”
Hood v. Lawrence National Bank (1968)
kan · cites it 3×
“They argue there is a vital distinction between the suppression of a will in violation of K.S.A. 59-618 by any person who has possession or knowledge of such will and access to it and who knowingly withholds it from probate, and a family settlement agreement not to probate the…”
In Re the Estate of Seth (2008)
kanctapp · cites it 12×
“: This appeal frames for our determination the interpretation and application of K.S.A. 59-618, which specifies circumstances for the belated admission of a will to probate by an innocent beneficiary after it has been knowingly withheld from probate during the 6 months following…”
Curtis v. Freden (1978)
kan
“The court erred in failing to find that the grantees had possession of grantor’s will at the time of grantor’s death, the same providing for equal distribution of all real estate, and knowingly withheld it from the probate court in contravention of K.S.A. 59-618.” Within thirty…”
In Re the Estate of Campbell (1994)
kanctapp
“K.S.A. 1993 Supp. 59-618. The existence of a subsequent will dated October 24, 1990, inevitably and unavoidably required the district court to determine which will was valid and admissible after a full and complete hearing of the circumstances surrounding the execution of both…”
In re the Estate of Carothers (1979)
kanctapp
“She relies on K.S.A. 59-618, which penalizes a custodian who withholds a will, and on cases which say a named executor has a duty to present a will and endeavor to admit it to probate.”
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.