No agreement to make a will or to make a devise or bequest by will shall be enforceable unless it is in writing. The agreement shall be signed by the maker or by some other person at the maker's express direction. If signed by a person other than the maker, the instrument shall be subscribed by two or more competent witnesses who heard the maker acknowledge that it was signed at the maker's direction.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1953–2025 · leading case: Hammond v. Perry, 2013-Ohio-3683.
Hammond v. Perry, 2013-Ohio-3683. · cites it 16דR.C. 2107.04 provides that “[n]o agreement to make a will or to make a devise or bequest by will shall be enforceable unless it is in writing.”
Frantz v. Maher, Exr., 155 N.E.2d 471 (Ohio Ct. App. 2d Dist. 1957). · cites it 18ד(1) Section 2107.04, Revised Code, a special statute of frauds, which provides that: “No agreement to make a will or to make a devise or bequest by will shall be enforceable unless it is in writing.”
Gottfried-Smith v. Gottfried, 695 N.E.2d 1229 (Ohio Ct. App. 6th Dist. 1997). · cites it 5דFirst, appellant begins her argument in support of her first assignment of error by acknowledging that under Ohio law, specific performance of an oral contract to leave a business to an employee by a will in exchange for the employee’s work is not available because of R.”
Brannan v. Fowler, 654 N.E.2d 434 (Ohio Ct. App. 4th Dist. 1995). · cites it 3דAppellee filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that appellant’s complaint alleged an oral contract to make a will, prohibited by R.C. 2107.04. Therefore, appellee argued, he was entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”
Widok v. Est. of Wolf, 2020-Ohio-5178. “The Estate properly states that, pursuant to R.C. 2107.04, “no agreement to make a will or to make a devise or bequest by will shall be enforceable unless it is in writing.”
Erwin v. Wanda E. Wise Revocable Trust, 2013-Ohio-952. · cites it 31ד) barred by R.C. 2107.04, which requires that an agreement to 1 The exact terms of this alleged oral agreement are unclear.”
Swank v. Swank, 2011-Ohio-6920. · cites it 2דThis Court found the various contractual interests Clark and Robert claimed were in reality an unenforceable contract to make a will, because there was no present interest, by partnership or otherwise, supported by the evidence and that the trial court's conclusion was contrary…”
In re Est. of Bohl, 2016-Ohio-637. “{¶ 36} Larry's contention that the magistrate in this case "was the sole judge of the credibility of the witnesses" is clearly incorrect.”
Thomas v. Delgado, 2022-Ohio-4235, 201 N.E.3d 1021. “14 BE 0051, 2016-Ohio-4916 , ¶ 56; R.C. 2107.04. Nor is there a dispute as to whether the defendants were aware of the provisions of Adelina’s will.”
Rogers v. Helmes, 432 N.E.2d 186 (Ohio 1982). · cites it 2ד03, nor is it even found in Section 2107.04, Revised Code, relating to an agreement to make a will, the word, ‘competent,’ alone appearing therein.”
Clark v. Clark, 2025-Ohio-159, 262 N.E.3d 473. · cites it 3דIn paragraph nineteen of his complaint, Jay states, “in exchange for operating Clark Brothers, Defendant Clark promised [Jay] that, upon her death, he would receive [Artie’s] shares in Clark Brothers if [Jay] would take care of the farm.”
In re Guardianship of Mull, 2015-Ohio-5440. · cites it 2ד{¶35} Florida law provides: No agreement to make a will, to give a devise, not to revoke a will, not to revoke a devise, not to make a will, or not to make a devise shall be binding or enforceable unless the agreement is in writing and signed by the agreeing party in the…”
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.