Wash. Rev. Code » Title 11 · Chapter 11.12
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 11.12.040 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) A will, or any part thereof, can be revoked:
(a) By a subsequent will that revokes, or partially revokes, the prior will expressly or by inconsistency; or
(b) By being burnt, torn, canceled, obliterated, destroyed, or a physical act, with the intent and for the purpose of revoking the same, by the testator or by another person in the presence and by the direction of the testator. If such act is done by any person other than the testator, the direction of the testator and the facts of such injury or destruction must be proved by two witnesses.
(2) Revocation of a will in its entirety revokes its codicils, unless revocation of a codicil would be contrary to the testator's intent.
[ 2021 c 140 s 1014; 1994 c 221 s 12; 1965 c 145 s 11.12.040. Prior: 1917 c 156 s 28; RRS s 1398; prior: Code 1881 s 1321; 1863 p 207 s 55; 1860 p 170 s 22.]

Notes:

Effective date—2021 c 140 ss 1001-1016: See note following RCW 11.12.400.
Effective dates—1994 c 221: See note following RCW 11.100.035.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1954–2025 · leading case: In Re Est. of Bowers, 131 P.3d 916 (Wash. Ct. App. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In Re Est. of Bowers, 131 P.3d 916 (Wash. Ct. App. 2006). “[6] A will can be revoked in the following manner: (a) By a subsequent will that revokes, or partially revokes, the prior will expressly or by inconsistency; or (b) By being burnt, torn, canceled, obliterated, or destroyed, with the intent and for the purpose of revoking the…”
In Re Gardner's Est., 417 P.2d 948 (Wash. 1966). · cites it 4× “See, RCW 11.12.040. [2] [2] In In re Wind's Estate, 27 Wn.”
Sunderland v. Whitcomb, 55 P.3d 664 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). “The statute was intended to reduce or eliminate uncertainty regarding the *844 effect of a subsequent will on the transfer of property pursuant to an inter vivos trust.”
Malloy v. Smith, 134 Wash. 2d 316 (Wash. 1998). · cites it 4× “005(9), RCW 11.12.040. It also has determined that in order to be valid, a will must be in writing, formally executed and attested to by two witnesses.”
Berghmans v. Museum of Flight, 131 P.3d 916 (Wash. Ct. App. 2006). “A will can be revoked in the following manner: (a) By a subsequent will that revokes, or partially revokes, the prior will expressly or by inconsistency; or (b) By being burnt, torn, canceled, obliterated, or destroyed, with the intent and for the purpose of revoking the same,…”
In Re Gherra's Est., 267 P.2d 91 (Wash. 1954). “, § 1398]; In re Elliott’s Estate supra); the burning, canceling, tearing, or obliterating of a will by the testator, or in his presence or by his consent or direction (RCW 11.12.040); the subsequent marriage or divorce of the testator (RCW 11.”
Matter of Est. of Malloy, 949 P.2d 804 (Wash. 1998). · cites it 4× “005(9), RCW 11.12.040. It also has determined that in order to be valid, a will must be in writing, formally executed and attested to by two witnesses.”
Malloy v. Smith, 925 P.2d 224 (Wash. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 4× “Former RCW 11.12.040 1 permits a testator to partially revoke her will without observing the formalities for executing a new will.”
Matter of Est. of Eastman, 812 P.2d 521 (Wash. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 2× “RCW 11.12.040 permits the partial revocation of wills.”
Tyer v. Miller, 417 P.2d 948 (Wash. 1966). · cites it 4× “See, RCW 11.12.040. 2 In In re Wind’s Estate, 27 Wn.”
Est. Of Edwin Robert Goulter Jr (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 4× “Under RCW 11.12.040, a will may be revoked by “being burnt, torn, canceled, obliterated, destroyed, or a physical act, with the intent and for the purpose of revoking the same, by the testator or by another person in the presence and by the direction of the testator.”
Julie Reznick & Carol Lorenzen v. Livengood, Alskog, Pllc (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “2d 2Under RCW 11.12.040(1) "A will, or any part thereof, can be revoked: .”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.12.040(1) — 4 cases
In Re Est. of Bowers, 131 P.3d 916 (Wash. Ct. App. 2006). “[6] A will can be revoked in the following manner: (a) By a subsequent will that revokes, or partially revokes, the prior will expressly or by inconsistency; or (b) By being burnt, torn, canceled, obliterated, or destroyed, with the intent and for the purpose of revoking the…”
Berghmans v. Museum of Flight, 131 P.3d 916 (Wash. Ct. App. 2006). “A will can be revoked in the following manner: (a) By a subsequent will that revokes, or partially revokes, the prior will expressly or by inconsistency; or (b) By being burnt, torn, canceled, obliterated, or destroyed, with the intent and for the purpose of revoking the same,…”
Julie Reznick & Carol Lorenzen v. Livengood, Alskog, Pllc (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “2d 2Under RCW 11.12.040(1) "A will, or any part thereof, can be revoked: .”
Est. Of Edwin Robert Goulter Jr (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). “Under RCW 11.12.040, a will may be revoked by “being burnt, torn, canceled, obliterated, destroyed, or a physical act, with the intent and for the purpose of revoking the same, by the testator or by another person in the presence and by the direction of the testator.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.12.040(1)(a) — 1 case
Sunderland v. Whitcomb, 55 P.3d 664 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). “The statute was intended to reduce or eliminate uncertainty regarding the *844 effect of a subsequent will on the transfer of property pursuant to an inter vivos trust.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.12.040(1)(b) — 1 case
Est. Of Edwin Robert Goulter Jr (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). “Under RCW 11.12.040, a will may be revoked by “being burnt, torn, canceled, obliterated, destroyed, or a physical act, with the intent and for the purpose of revoking the same, by the testator or by another person in the presence and by the direction of the testator.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.12.040(2) — 1 case
Malloy v. Smith, 925 P.2d 224 (Wash. Ct. App. 1996). “Former RCW 11.12.040 1 permits a testator to partially revoke her will without observing the formalities for executing a new 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.