Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 2107
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 2107.33 (2026)

Revocation of will

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Effective:
March 22, 2019
Latest Legislation:
House Bill 595 - 132nd General Assembly
PDF:
Download Authenticated PDF
 

(A) A will shall be revoked in the following manners:

(1) By the testator by tearing, canceling, obliterating, or destroying it with the intention of revoking it;

(2) By some person, at the request of the testator and in the testator's presence, by tearing, canceling, obliterating, or destroying it with the intention of revoking it;

(3) By some person tearing, canceling, obliterating, or destroying it pursuant to the testator's express written direction;

(4) By some other written will or codicil, executed as prescribed by this chapter;

(5) By some other writing that is signed, attested, and subscribed in the manner provided by this chapter.

(B) If after executing a will, a testator is divorced, obtains a dissolution of marriage, has the testator's marriage annulled, or, upon actual separation from the testator's spouse, enters into a separation agreement pursuant to which the parties intend to fully and finally settle their prospective property rights in the property of the other, whether by expected inheritance or otherwise, any disposition or appointment of property made by the will to the former spouse or to a trust with powers created by or available to the former spouse, any provision in the will conferring a general or special power of appointment on the former spouse, and any nomination in the will of the former spouse as executor, trustee, or guardian shall be revoked unless the will expressly provides otherwise.

(C) Property prevented from passing to a former spouse or to a trust with powers created by or available to the former spouse because of revocation by this section shall pass as if the former spouse failed to survive the decedent, and other provisions conferring some power or office on the former spouse shall be interpreted as if the spouse failed to survive the decedent. If provisions are revoked solely by this section, they shall be deemed to be revived by the testator's remarriage with the former spouse or upon the termination of a separation agreement executed by them.

(D) A bond, agreement, or covenant made by a testator, for a valuable consideration, to convey property previously devised or bequeathed in a will does not revoke the devise or bequest. The property passes by the devise or bequest, subject to the remedies on the bond, agreement, or covenant, for a specific performance or otherwise, against the devisees or legatees, that might be had by law against the heirs of the testator, or the testator's next of kin, if the property had descended to them.

(E) A testator's revocation of a will shall be valid only if the testator, at the time of the revocation, has the same capacity as the law requires for the execution of a will.

(F) As used in this section:

(1) "Trust with powers created by or available to the former spouse" means a trust that is revocable by the former spouse, with respect to which the former spouse has a power of withdrawal, or with respect to which the former spouse may take a distribution that is not subject to an ascertainable standard but does not mean a trust in which those powers of the former spouse are revoked by section 5815.31 of the Revised Code or similar provisions in the law of another state.

(2) "Ascertainable standard" means a standard that is related to a trust beneficiary's health, maintenance, support, or education.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 25 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1954–2025 · leading case: Bowling v. Deaton, 507 N.E.2d 1152 (Ohio Ct. App. 1986).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Bowling v. Deaton, 507 N.E.2d 1152 (Ohio Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 7× “” Therefore, since only bequests to a former spouse are specifically revoked due to the provisions of R.C. 2107.33 (C), 2 and since R.C. 2107.33(D) mandates that any alternate bequests in a will shall pass as if the former spouse failed to survive the decedent, we are required…”
Buehler v. Buehler, 425 N.E.2d 905 (Ohio Ct. App. 1979). · cites it 2× “That Section 2107.33 O. R. C. is applicable to this matter.”
In re Est. of Cornetet, 2010 Ohio 4874 (Ohio Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 3× “Miller argues the trial court erred in 1) finding there was insufficient evidence to overcome the presumption that the will had been revoked; 2) excluding certain witness testimony as hearsay; 3) finding that there was no evidence of intent to revoke the will, as required by…”
Kronauge v. Stoecklein, 293 N.E.2d 320 (Ohio Ct. App. 1972). · cites it 2× “Headnote 3 of that case states: “Revocation of a will within the provisions of Section 10504-47 GrC [Section 2107.33, R. C.] may be accomplished by tearing, however slight, if done with the intention of revoking the will.”
Hackmann v. Dawley, 663 N.E.2d 1342 (Ohio Ct. App. 1995). “This position of the appellant seemed quite reasonable, especially in light of R.C. 2107.33(E), which states: “A bond, agreement or covenant made by a testator, for a valuable consideration, to convey property previously devised or bequeathed in a will, does not revoke the…”
In Re Est. of Mantalis, 671 N.E.2d 1062 (Ohio Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 5× “33(A) states: “A will shall be revoked by the testator by tearing, canceling, obliterating, or destroying it with the intention of revoking it, or by some person in the testator’s presence, or by the testator’s express written direction, or by some other written will or codicil,…”
Mattax v. Moore, 595 N.E.2d 969 (Ohio Ct. App. 1991). “In other words, the decedent revoked the will “by tearing, cancelling, obliterating or destroying it with the intention of revoking it * * R.C. 2107.33. In making his argument, appellant relies on R.”
Gockel v. Eble, 648 N.E.2d 539 (Ohio Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 7× “In addition, R.C. 2107.33 5 dictates that a new will does not constitute a valid revocation of a prior will unless the new will was properly executed in accordance with R.”
McNelis v. Crain, 2016 Ohio 8523 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016). “See R.C. 2107.33(A)(4) (a will is revoked by “some other written will or codicil, executed as prescribed by this chapter.”
Marinakis v. Marinakis, 2025 Ohio 2555 (Ohio Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 2× “{¶ 14} The probate court began its analysis by examining the legislative history of a different statute, R.C. 2107.33. It noted that the statute's 1976 amendment eliminated the common-law doctrine of implied revocation, which had treated wills as revoked by subsequent events…”
Beadle v. O'Konski-Lewis, 2016 Ohio 4749 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016). “Appellant cites R.C. 2107.33(G) and First Natl. Bank of Cincinnati v.”
In Re Est. of Carmedy, 642 N.E.2d 1170 (Ohio Ct. App. 1994). “He also recommended a finding that the document did not constitute a revocation of prior wills because it did not meet the requirements of R.C. 2107.33(A), even though it (the alleged will) contained a statement that “I also declear [sic ] all other LAST WILL [sic ]: NULL AND…”
Show all 25 citing cases →
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2107.33(A) — 4 cases
In Re Est. of Mantalis, 671 N.E.2d 1062 (Ohio Ct. App. 1996). “33(A) states: “A will shall be revoked by the testator by tearing, canceling, obliterating, or destroying it with the intention of revoking it, or by some person in the testator’s presence, or by the testator’s express written direction, or by some other written will or codicil,…”
In Re Est. of Carmedy, 642 N.E.2d 1170 (Ohio Ct. App. 1994). “He also recommended a finding that the document did not constitute a revocation of prior wills because it did not meet the requirements of R.C. 2107.33(A), even though it (the alleged will) contained a statement that “I also declear [sic ] all other LAST WILL [sic ]: NULL AND…”
Horst v. Horst, 920 N.E.2d 441 (Ohio Ct. App. 2009).
Gockel v. Eble, 648 N.E.2d 539 (Ohio Ct. App. 1994). “In addition, R.C. 2107.33 5 dictates that a new will does not constitute a valid revocation of a prior will unless the new will was properly executed in accordance with R.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2107.33(A)(4) — 1 case
McNelis v. Crain, 2016 Ohio 8523 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016). “See R.C. 2107.33(A)(4) (a will is revoked by “some other written will or codicil, executed as prescribed by this chapter.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2107.33(C) — 1 case
Bowling v. Deaton, 507 N.E.2d 1152 (Ohio Ct. App. 1986). “” Therefore, since only bequests to a former spouse are specifically revoked due to the provisions of R.C. 2107.33 (C), 2 and since R.C. 2107.33(D) mandates that any alternate bequests in a will shall pass as if the former spouse failed to survive the decedent, we are required…”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2107.33(D) — 3 cases
Bowling v. Deaton, 507 N.E.2d 1152 (Ohio Ct. App. 1986). “” Therefore, since only bequests to a former spouse are specifically revoked due to the provisions of R.C. 2107.33 (C), 2 and since R.C. 2107.33(D) mandates that any alternate bequests in a will shall pass as if the former spouse failed to survive the decedent, we are required…”
In re Est. of Bringman, 2017 Ohio 7083 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017).
Dragovich v. Dragovich, 2012 Ohio 4114 (Ohio Ct. App. 2012).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2107.33(E) — 1 case
Hackmann v. Dawley, 663 N.E.2d 1342 (Ohio Ct. App. 1995). “This position of the appellant seemed quite reasonable, especially in light of R.C. 2107.33(E), which states: “A bond, agreement or covenant made by a testator, for a valuable consideration, to convey property previously devised or bequeathed in a will, does not revoke the…”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2107.33(G) — 1 case
Beadle v. O'Konski-Lewis, 2016 Ohio 4749 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016). “Appellant cites R.C. 2107.33(G) and First Natl. Bank of Cincinnati v.”
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.