Inspired by this thread, what happens if a will is executed and afterwards a newer will (which invalidates the earlier one and is not merely a codicil) is found? Are there time restrictions?
How can a newer will be executed after a previous one? Wills are executed on the successful declaration of death on a person. Wouldn’t that mean someone came back to life and died a second time?
Now, I see what you mean if a newer will is dated later than the newer one–then the earlier will would be superceded by the later will. However, a will is just an instrument in place to be executed should something happen. Essentially, it’s a checklist: “If ‘A’ happens, do ‘B’.” The checklist can be updated from time to time, but the laws usually agree that the latest dated instruction supercedes all earlier ones.
Tripler
Dead then alive and dead again. Man that’d be one hell of a party trick! :dubious:
In the thread in question, the known will is 30 years old. It’s reasonable that the will might have been rewritten - to mention newer grandchildren, for instance -sometime in those 30 years. Suppose the 30-year old will is executed and afterwards a newer will, written last year, is found. Is it too late?
Just remember, that site is speaking in generalities that may not be true in your jurisdiction.
Even if you hire a local atty. to deal w/ your grandfathers estate, it would be wise to do some reseach on your own. In this day and age that is pretty easy to do.
When my mother died (1973) my father was mostly angry, about various things, so I handled the arrangemens and I was a consumer first and a grieving son second, same when my father died (1984). Funeral directors are salespeople first and sympathizers second. Not to denigrate them, they’re in business to make money and you have avoid being taken advantage of because of the circumstances.
Can’t speak for American law-speak, but in Canada, “execution of a will” means the act of signing it by the testator, in the presence of witnesses. Then each witness may sign an “Affadivit of Execution”, swearing that they witnessed the testator sign the will.
Ah, thanks. Doesn’t this mean, though, that if a person benefits under one will and doesn’t benefit under a later will, if they can successfully hide the later will, then they can essentially defraud the estate?
Again, IANAL, but I’d guess that in that event, you would have to take civil action against the person who concealed the later will. There might be criminal charges also.
I’m sorry, Tripler, but I think you are confused and incorrect, here. You may be confused by the fact that the “executor” of the will doesn’t do anything until after death. But after death, the will is offered for “probate”, not “execution.”
Execution of an instrument means the completion of the instrument, including everything needed to make it valid. For a will, that means using the appropriate form, having a signature, etc. See, for example, the definition in Black’s Law Dictionary (5th ed., 1979): “A written intrument executed with the formalities required by statutes, …”
I’ve never done stiffs and gifts (thank goodness; boring work imho). But in most cases where there has been a fraud upon the court, the judgment of the court can be revisited. I would not be surprised in such a case if the probate court could re-open the disposition of the estate.
Perhaps someone with the knowledge, or desire to spend a cold Sunday afternoon researching, can chime in.
I considered that possibility, but wouldn’t it be less complicated to go directly after the culprit, rather than trying to buck established precedent, or even statutory law?
I think this is probably a UK vs US language difference. I’m named as an executor of my aunt’s will and when she dies I will execute it. Part of that will be the probate process.
I think you’re both right: my understanding of wills comes from a knowledge of contracts. To wit, I thought a will was essentially a contract to be carried out without a living signator–making the remaining estate of the deceased the interested party. The instrument of the contract is ‘the will’. The instrument contains the plan to be ‘executed’ upon the actual death of the once-living signator. But DSYoungEsq, I do see what you mean!
Again, my knowledge of these things is based off of government contracts. I could be wrong in terminology, but then again as Quartz points out, it may be a dialect thing. . .
Tripler
I still think it would be a great party trick tho. . .
Quartz, I don’t know where you live from your reference, but if in the UK, I expect that you would actually be named executor of the estate (or executrix if you prefer and are female ). Where no will exists, an individual may apply to the courts to be named administrator of the estate.
Just to be clear I’m writing this from the perspective of a lawyer in Canada who does not practiced estate law.
I’m a bit confused about your question. I’m not sure if you are asking whether there’s a time limit for revoking one’s will and replacing it with a different one while you are still alive. (There isn’t one based on time, but you’d need to be competent to draft a will when you did it.) or whether one could find a newer will after an older one had been probated and the estate closed (gets a bit tricky). For the latter question here is Michigan’s statute on point:
It’s a safe bet that other states have different rules.
**Tripler ** contracts are “executed,” to the extent that term is used when they are signed, and performed when they are completed. Although a partially-performed contract is often called “executory.” Similarly, wills are executed, when the formalities necessary for making a will are complete, and probated when their maker dies.
Seriously, most states impose limits on when, and under what circumstances a new will may be invoked to invalidated a probate court order approving distribution of assets under a previous will. I already quoted Michigan’s.
). Where no will exists, an individual may apply to the courts to be named administrator of the estate.