A. If, after making a will, the testator is divorced, all provisions in such will in favor of the testator's spouse so divorced are thereby revoked. Annulment of the testator's marriage shall have the same effect as a divorce. In the event of either divorce or annulment, the testator's former spouse shall be treated for all purposes under the will as having predeceased the testator. Provided, however, this section shall not apply if the decree of divorce or of annulment is vacated or if the testator remarries his former spouse, or following said divorce or annulment, executes a new will or codicil which is not revoked or held invalid. B. This section shall apply to any will of a decedent dying on or after November 1, 1987. Amended by Laws 1987, c. 201, § 1, eff. Nov. 1, 1987.
Notes of Decisions
Miller v. First Nat'l Bank & Trust Co., 637 P.2d 75 (Okla. 1981).
· cites it 5× “The District Court found that: pursuant to 84 O.S.1971 § 114, any bequests in the instrument designated “Last Will and Testament” by the decedent to Frances L.”
In Re Est. of Lamparella, 109 P.3d 959 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2005).
“20(c)(5) (West 2004); Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 84, § 114 (2005); Tenn.”
Matter of Est. of Carroll, 749 P.2d 571 (Okla. Civ. App. 1988).
· cites it 2× “Two primary questions emanate from the proceedings below: (1) Does the weight of the evidence clearly support the trial court’s finding that testator, Ben O’Dell Carroll, was a single man when he executed his last will on April 5,1977? and (2) Did the trial court err as a matter…”
Richardson v. First Nat'l Bank & Trust Co. of Nowata, 2002 OK CIV APP 69 (Okla. Civ. App. 2002).
“In Miller, the issue was whether 84 O.S.1991 § 114, which revokes bequests for a spouse in a will in the event the testator and the spouse have divorced after the execution of the will, also operated to revoke provisions for the spouse made in a trust which was incorporated by…”
Matter of Est. of Freeman, 651 P.2d 1071 (Okla. Civ. App. 1982).
· cites it 2× “The trial court resolved the controversy by ruling that because of the divorce Linda Freeman was precluded by 84 O.S.1981, § 114 1 from receiving anything under the will, that the wording above created an unambiguous condition precedent that Linda Freeman predecease Roy Freeman,…”
In the Matter of the Est. of Melissa Evans, Joshua Evans v. Greer, 2025 OK 89 (Okla. 2025).
· cites it 2× “Annulment of the testator's marriage shall have the same effect as a divorce. In the event of either divorce or annulment, the testator's former spouse shall be treated for all purposes under the will as having predeceased the testator.”
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.