Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 133.130 (2026)

Effect of revocation of subsequent will

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

NRS 133.130 Effect of revocation of subsequent will. If, after the making of any will, the testator executes a valid second will that includes provisions revoking the first will, the destruction, cancellation or revocation of the second will does not revive the first will unless:

1. It appears by the terms of the revocation or the manner in which the revocation occurred that it was the intention to revive and give effect to the first will; or

2. After the destruction, cancellation or revocation, the first will is reexecuted.

[9:61:1862; B § 820; BH § 3008; C § 3079; RL § 6210; NCL § 9913]—(NRS A 1999, 2257; 2017, 1672)

PROPERTY PASSING BY WILL

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 1961–2012 · leading case: State v. Palm, 272 P.3d 668 (Nev. 2012).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State v. Palm, 272 P.3d 668 (Nev. 2012). · cites it 10× “In this, we consider whether the district court erred in determining that the doctrine is precluded by NRS 133.130, which provides, in *39 relevant part, that where a testator executes two wills, the revocation of the second will does not operate to “revive the first will,”…”

Shephard v. Gebo, 361 P.2d 537 (Nev. 1961). “NRS 133.130. “If when a subject has been disposed of in a will and the same subject is again disposed of, either in a subsequent will or in a codicil, then if you can find, apart from the description of the subject, words expressly or impliedly effecting revocation, that…”

In Re Krukenberg's Est., 361 P.2d 537 (Nev. 1961). “NRS 133.130. "If when a subject has been disposed of in a will and the same subject is again disposed of, either in a subsequent will or in a codicil, then if you can find, apart from the description of the subject, words expressly or impliedly effecting revocation, that…”

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.