Oklahoma Statutes

Okla. Stat. tit. 84, § 132 (2026)

Provision for children unintentionally omitted

✓ current as of July 2026

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

When any testator omits to provide in his will for any of his children, or for the issue of any deceased child unless it appears that such omission was intentional, such child, or the issue of such child, must have the same share in the estate of the testator, as if he had died intestate, and succeeds thereto as provided in the preceding section. R.L. 1910, Sec. 8372.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 37 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1953–2023 · leading case: Hooper v. Clinkingbeard, 848 P.2d 1146 (Okla. 1993).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Hooper v. Clinkingbeard, 848 P.2d 1146 (Okla. 1993). · cites it 16× “Flowers Hooper (Hooper/adopted daughter/pretermitted heir), qualifies as a pretermitted heir under 84 O.S.1991 § 132; 2 and 2) whether extrinsic evidence is admissible to demonstrate the adoptive mother’s intent.”

Est. of Glomset, 547 P.2d 951 (Okla. 1976). · cites it 14× “On February 7, 1974, a hearing was held, in which Appellee's motion for a declaratory judgment that Appellee was a pretermitted heir, as defined by Title 84 O.S. § 132, and entitled to share in her father's estate, was sustained.”

Welch v. Crow, 2009 OK 20 (Okla. 2009). · cites it 3× “111 The grandchildren argue that as pretermitted heirs, they are entitled to a statutory share in the Trust under 84 O.S.2001 § 132. 14 The trustees respond that § 182 applies only to wills, and not to trusts.”

Est. of Hoobler, 925 P.2d 13 (Okla. 1996). · cites it 6× “PURSUANT TO 84 O.S.1991 § 132, THE GRANDCHILDREN HAVE A VIABLE CLAIM TO SHARE IN THE ESTATE AS PRETERMITTED HEIRS.”

Matter of Est. of Eversole, 885 P.2d 657 (Okla. 1994). · cites it 3× “When an ancestor makes a conditional testamentary bequest to beneficiaries who were not otherwise provided for, the will is deemed to address the potential pretermission and the statute [84 O.S.1991 § 132] will not apply. 39 This principle is consistent with our statutory regime…”

Est. of Crump v. Freeman, 614 P.2d 1096 (Okla. 1980). · cites it 3× “OP ALA, Justice: The issue on appeal is [1] whether it is apparent from the four corners of the will that testator’s omission to provide for the daughter of his deceased son was intentional, and if not, [2] would she be entitled to take her distributive share as an omitted heir…”

Matter of Est. of Nation, 834 P.2d 442 (Okla. 1992). · cites it 5× “For the terms of Oklahoma's unintentionally omitted-child statute, see 84 O.S.1991 § 132, infra note 11. In this dissent I use the terms "omitted child,” "omitted heir,” or “pretermitted heir” as synonyms.”

In Re Est. of Daniels, 401 P.2d 493 (Okla. 1965). · cites it 7× “The district court on appeal from the county court held that it does not appear from the four corners of the will that its failure to provide for the testator’s daughter, the mother of his grandchildren, was intentional, and that the grandchildren for whom the will failed to…”

In the Matter of the Est. of Parker, 2023 OK 50 (Okla. 2023). · cites it 6× “Additionally, the lower court concluded that as pretermitted heirs, the daughters were entitled to an intestate share of Decedent's estate pursuant to 84 O.S.2011, § 132 84 O.S.2011, § 133 84 O.”

Bridgeford v. Est. of Chamberlin, 573 P.2d 694 (Okla. 1977). · cites it 2× “84 O.S.1971 § 132, while allowing a testator to disinherit any or all of his children, makes it mandatory that the will show on its face that an omission to provide for any child is intentional.”

Pease v. Whitlatch, 397 P.2d 894 (Okla. 1964). · cites it 4× “That statute, 84 O.S.1961, § 132, is of provision as follows, to-wit: “When any testator omits to provide in his will for any of his children, or for the issue of any deceased child unless it appears that such omission was intentional, such child, or the issue of such child,…”

Matter of Est. of Flowers, 848 P.2d 1146 (Okla. 1993). “1976): The purpose and legislative intent of [ Okla. Stat. tit. 84, § 132 ] is to protect children unintentionally omitted from the will.”

Show all 37 citing cases →

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.