Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 32-1-201 (2026)
Actions effecting a revocation of will
✓ current as of May 2026
A will or any part thereof is revoked by:
- (1) A subsequent will, other than a nuncupative will, that revokes the prior will or part expressly or by inconsistency;
- (2) Document of revocation, executed with all the formalities of an attested will or a holographic will, but not a nuncupative will, that revokes the prior will or part expressly;
- (3) Being burned, torn, cancelled, obliterated or destroyed, with the intent and for the purpose of revoking it, by the testator or by another person in the testator's presence and by the testator's direction; or
- (4) Both the subsequent marriage and the birth of a child of the testator, but divorce or annulment of the subsequent marriage does not revive a prior will.
Acts 1985, ch. 139, § 1; 1992, ch. 951, § 8.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1994–2025 · leading case: In Re Est. of Boote, 198 S.W.3d 699 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005).
In Re Est. of Boote, 198 S.W.3d 699 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005). “Tenn.Code Ann. §§ 32-1-201, 32-1-202 (2001).”
In Re: The Est. of Wanda Jeanne Starkey, 556 S.W.3d 811 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2018). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 32-1-201 (3) (2015). In addition, the original of the 2009 Will had been submitted to the court.”
In Re Est. of Boote, 265 S.W.3d 402 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). “Evidence on this element must exclude the possibility that the testamentary instrument was revoked by any of the actions listed in Tenn.Code Ann. § 32-1-201 (2007). 20 . The evidence presented by the Boote daughters regarding the discrepancies with regard to the signature and…”
In Re Est. of Meade, 156 S.W.3d 841 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 32-1-201(1)), or, as concluded by the Trial Court, whether it was mere notes and memoranda of an intent to make a formal will in the future.”
Green v. Higdon, 891 S.W.2d 220 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1994). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 32-1-201(1). Ms. Higdon and the church admitted that the January 18, 1985 will was executed according to law but attacked it on the grounds of lack of testamentary capacity and undue influence.”
In Re: Est. of J.B. Warren, 3 S.W.3d 493 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1999). “T.C.A. § 32-1-201(3) (Supp.1997). Although our research of Tennessee case law revealed no decisions interpreting this specific statute, this court previously has addressed the question of what constitutes a valid revocation of a will provision.”
In Re Est. of Joseph Owen Boote, Jr. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 32-1-201 (3) (2001). -4- codicil could be revoked in accordance with the statutory requirements.”
Lee v. Gilliam, 156 S.W.3d 841 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 32-1-201(1)), or, as concluded by the Trial Court, whether it was mere notes and memoranda of an intent to make a formal will in the future.”
In Re Est. of William Joe Powell (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 32-1-201 provides as follows with respect to actions that will result in the revocation of a will: A will or any part thereof is revoked by: (1) A subsequent will other than a noncupative will that revokes the prior will or part expressly or by inconsistency;…”
Hudson (Bankr. E.D. Tenn. 2025). “Perkins] revoked the [2018 Will] in compliance with Tennessee Code Annotated Section 32-1-201, Subpart 3[15].” [Tr. at 14:8-12.”
The Est. of Charles Thomas Mccraw v. JoAn Likins (Tenn. Ct. App. 2009). “The parties further agree that this provision of the parties’ Marital Dissolution Agreement is not effected by Tennessee Code Annotated § 32-1-201, Tennessee Code Annotated § 32-1-202, or any other law to the contrary.”
Lee Greer v. Maureen Zolfagharbik (Tenn. Ct. App. 2000). “She asserts that under Tennessee Code Annotated § 32-1-201, only the testator or a person in the testator’s presence may effectively revoke a will by destroying it; therefore, the attempted revocation of the will was ineffective because Timmons was not present when Swayne…”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 32-1-201(1) — 5 cases
In Re Est. of Boote, 198 S.W.3d 699 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005). “Tenn.Code Ann. §§ 32-1-201, 32-1-202 (2001).”
In Re Est. of Meade, 156 S.W.3d 841 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 32-1-201(1)), or, as concluded by the Trial Court, whether it was mere notes and memoranda of an intent to make a formal will in the future.”
Green v. Higdon, 891 S.W.2d 220 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1994). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 32-1-201(1). Ms. Higdon and the church admitted that the January 18, 1985 will was executed according to law but attacked it on the grounds of lack of testamentary capacity and undue influence.”
Lee v. Gilliam, 156 S.W.3d 841 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 32-1-201(1)), or, as concluded by the Trial Court, whether it was mere notes and memoranda of an intent to make a formal will in the future.”
In Re Est. of Joseph Owen Boote, Jr. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 32-1-201 (3) (2001). -4- codicil could be revoked in accordance with the statutory requirements.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 32-1-201(3) — 2 cases
In Re Est. of Boote, 198 S.W.3d 699 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005). “Tenn.Code Ann. §§ 32-1-201, 32-1-202 (2001).”
In Re: Est. of J.B. Warren, 3 S.W.3d 493 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1999). “T.C.A. § 32-1-201(3) (Supp.1997). Although our research of Tennessee case law revealed no decisions interpreting this specific statute, this court previously has addressed the question of what constitutes a valid revocation of a will provision.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 32-1-201(4) — 1 case
In Re: The Est. of Wanda Jeanne Starkey, 556 S.W.3d 811 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2018). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 32-1-201 (3) (2015). In addition, the original of the 2009 Will had been submitted to the court.”
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.