Oklahoma Statutes

Okla. Stat. tit. 58, § 82 (2026)

Special requisites of proof

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section OK-LEGoklegislature.gov JustiaOkla. Stat. CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

No will shall be proved as a lost or destroyed will, unless the same is proved to have been in existence at the time of the death of the testator or is shown to have been fraudulently destroyed in the lifetime of the testator, nor unless its provisions are clearly and distinctly proved by at least two credible witnesses. For purposes of this section, a copy of the alleged lost or destroyed will can be admitted into evidence, whether or not the copy reflects the signature or signatures appearing on the original will, if the copy is properly identified, and the court shall determine what probative value, if any, is to be assigned to such copy. R.L. 1910, § 6227; Laws 1993, c. 345, § 6, eff. Sept. 1, 1993.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 8 cases, 1967–2016 · leading case: Est. of: I. Wilner Appeal of: Baker, L., 142 A.3d 796 (Pa. 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Est. of: I. Wilner Appeal of: Baker, L., 142 A.3d 796 (Pa. 2016). “” Okla. Stat. tit. 58, § 82 . . Arguing that we have failed to clarify why the clear-and-convincing standard should be deemed "chief among [the listed legislative] rivals,” Concurring Opinion, at 299, 142 A.”

Matter of Est. of Shaw, 572 P.2d 229 (Okla. 1977). · cites it 4× “There can be no doubt that failure to produce or find a will known to have been in the possession of the testator or readily accessible thereto prior to his death, raises a presumption of revocation of such instrument.”

Atkinson v. Barr, 428 P.2d 316 (Okla. 1967). “58 O.S.1961, § 82. The county court appointed Vinnin administrator and found the property was the homestead and set it aside as such to Vinnin’s use.”

Hunter v. Hunter, 470 P.2d 1020 (Okla. 1970). “The basis of the judgment was that the proof of the proponents did not meet the requirements of that portion of 58 O.S.1961, § 82, providing that, “No will shall be proved as a lost or destroyed will, * * * unless its provisions are clearly and distinctly proved by at least two…”

Matter of Est. of Robb, 581 P.2d 1327 (Okla. Civ. App. 1978). · cites it 3× “Hugh Herndon, proponent of the lost will and executor of the decedent’s estate, to designate that portion of the transcript satisfying the requirements of proof of a lost will under 58 O.S.1971, § 82 as follows: § 82. SPECIAL REQUISITES OF PROOF.”

Est. of Molloy v. Gillentine, 539 P.2d 1400 (Okla. Civ. App. 1975). · cites it 3× “The Court erred in sustaining Appellee’s Petition for probate of Lost Will in that the provisions of the purported Lost Will were not clearly and distinctly proved by at least two credible witnesses as required by the Statutes and Laws of the State of Oklahoma.”

Roberts v. McCrory, 693 F. Supp. 998 (W.D. Okla. 1987). “All of the provisions of the will must be clearly and distinctively proved by two credible witnesses who actually saw the will and who can testify to the contents of the will from his or her own knowledge.”

In re the Est. of Wilson, 875 P.2d 1154 (Okla. Civ. App. 1994). “Title 58 O.S.1991 § 82 (since amended, see 58 O.”

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.