112.235
Execution of a will.
(1) Except as provided in ORS 112.238, a will shall be in writing and shall be
executed in accordance with the following formalities:
(a) The testator,
in the presence of each of the witnesses, shall:
(A) Sign the
will;
(B) Direct one of
the witnesses or some other person to sign the name of the testator and the
signer’s own name on the will; or
(C) Acknowledge
the signature previously made on the will by the testator or at the testator’s
direction.
(b) At least two
witnesses shall each:
(A)(i) See the
testator sign the will;
(ii) Hear the
testator acknowledge the signature on the will; or
(iii) Hear or
observe the testator direct some other person to sign the name of the testator;
and
(B) Attest the
will by signing the witness’ name to the will within a reasonable time before
the testator’s death.
(2) The signature
by a witness on an affidavit executed contemporaneously with execution of a
will is considered a signature by the witness on the will in compliance with
subsection (1)(b)(A)(iii) of this section if necessary to prove the will was
duly executed in compliance with this section.
(3) A will
executed in compliance with the Uniform International Wills Act shall be deemed
to have complied with the formalities of this section.
(4) As used in
this section and ORS 112.238, “writing” does not include an electronic record,
document or image. [1969 c.591 §37; 1973 c.506 §7; 1981 c.481 §4; 2015 c.387 §11;
2025 c.34 §3]
Note: Section 6 (2), chapter 34, Oregon
Laws 2025, provides:
Sec. 6. (2) Notwithstanding section 36,
chapter 387, Oregon Laws 2015, the amendments to ORS 112.235 and 112.238 by
sections 3 and 4 of this 2025 Act apply to a writing executed before, on or
after the effective date of this 2025 Act [January 1, 2026], if the writing was
executed by or at the direction of a decedent dying on or after the effective
date of this 2025 Act. [2025 c.34 §6(2)]
112.237 [1981 c.481 §3; repealed by 1993
c.98 §26]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
9
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 1982–2025 · leading case:
Rogers v. Rogers, 691 P.2d 114 (Or. Ct. App. 1984).
Rogers v. Rogers, 691 P.2d 114 (Or. Ct. App. 1984).
· cites it 6× “The trial court ruled that, because the will had not been attested by two witnesses before the death of decedent, the will had not been validly executed and that decedent died intestate. The issue is whether a will to be duly executed must be signed and attested by two witnesses…”
Kirkeby v. Covenant House, 970 P.2d 241 (Or. Ct. App. 1998).
· cites it 10× “However, the codicil was not properly executed, ORS 112.235. 2 In July 1992, Margaret again decided to change her will.”
Culver v. Deaver (In re Est. of Boysen), 441 P.3d 633 (Or. Ct. App. 2019).
· cites it 5× “Generally, in order to execute a legally enforceable will, a testator must follow the formalities set out in ORS 112.235. 1 However, ORS 112.238 excuses those statutory formalities and provides: *25 "(1) Although a writing was not executed in compliance with ORS 112.”
In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Morin, 878 P.2d 393 (Or. 1994).
“” 2 ORS 112.235 provides, in part: “(1) The testator, in the presence of each of the witnesses, shall: “(a) Sign the will; or “(b) Direct one of the witnesses or some other person to sign thereon the name of the testator; or “(c) Acknowledge the signature previously made on the…”
Walker v. Walker, 929 P.2d 316 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
· cites it 6× “]” *147 Contestant argues that “the statements contained in the will do not literally or substantially comply” with ORS 112.235, which provides in part: “A will shall be in writing and shall be executed with the following formalities: “(1) The testator, in the presence of each…”
Jones v. Kuhn, 650 P.2d 999 (Or. Ct. App. 1982).
“See ORS 112.235. 4 Attorney fees are to be paid by the estate.”
Perry v. Adams, 827 P.2d 930 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).
· cites it 2× “A will has not been executed until all of the requirements of ORS 112.235 have been satisfied. See Rogers v.”
Est. of Whitlatch v. Richardson, 783 P.2d 46 (Or. Ct. App. 1989).
“255(1); ORS 112.235(3). The evidence is undisputed that the handwritten document was written by decedent.”
Asbridge v. Longoria, 341 Or. App. 554 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
“As for whether the 2017 will was duly executed, Asbridge contends that Holmes failed to prove that it was executed in accordance with ORS 112.235, which addresses the required formalities to execute a will.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 112.235(2) — 1 case
Walker v. Walker, 929 P.2d 316 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
“]” *147 Contestant argues that “the statements contained in the will do not literally or substantially comply” with ORS 112.235, which provides in part: “A will shall be in writing and shall be executed with the following formalities: “(1) The testator, in the presence of each…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 112.235(3) — 2 cases
Rogers v. Rogers, 691 P.2d 114 (Or. Ct. App. 1984).
“The trial court ruled that, because the will had not been attested by two witnesses before the death of decedent, the will had not been validly executed and that decedent died intestate. The issue is whether a will to be duly executed must be signed and attested by two witnesses…”
Est. of Whitlatch v. Richardson, 783 P.2d 46 (Or. Ct. App. 1989).
“255(1); ORS 112.235(3). The evidence is undisputed that the handwritten document was written by decedent.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 112.235(3)(c) — 2 cases
Rogers v. Rogers, 691 P.2d 114 (Or. Ct. App. 1984).
“The trial court ruled that, because the will had not been attested by two witnesses before the death of decedent, the will had not been validly executed and that decedent died intestate. The issue is whether a will to be duly executed must be signed and attested by two witnesses…”
Kirkeby v. Covenant House, 970 P.2d 241 (Or. Ct. App. 1998).
“However, the codicil was not properly executed, ORS 112.235. 2 In July 1992, Margaret again decided to change her will.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 112.235(l)(c) — 1 case
Kirkeby v. Covenant House, 970 P.2d 241 (Or. Ct. App. 1998).
“However, the codicil was not properly executed, ORS 112.235. 2 In July 1992, Margaret again decided to change her will.”
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.