Legal Definitions - dependent relative revocation

Dependent relative revocation is a legal principle that can revive a will that was previously revoked, but only if the revocation was conditional rather than absolute. This doctrine applies when a person (the "testator") revokes their existing will with the clear intention that a new will or a different estate plan will take its place. If that intended new plan fails for some reason (e.g., the new will is invalid, or the testator's understanding of the law was mistaken), the law may presume that the testator would have preferred their old will to remain in effect rather than dying without any valid will at all.

Essentially, the revocation of the old will is treated as dependent upon the success of the new plan. If the new plan fails, the condition for revoking the old will is not met, and the old will can be reinstated. It's important to note that this doctrine only undoes the revocation; it does not validate an otherwise invalid new will or automatically fulfill the testator's ultimate wishes if those wishes were never properly formalized.

Here are some examples to illustrate this concept:

• Example 1: Invalid New Will Due to Execution Error

  Eleanor had a valid will leaving all her assets to her two children. She decided to make a few minor changes, so she drafted a new will and, believing it was properly executed, physically tore up her old will. However, the new will was only signed by one witness, and state law requires two witnesses for a will to be valid. Since the new will failed due to an execution error, the court might apply the doctrine of dependent relative revocation. It would presume that Eleanor only revoked her old will because she thought the new one was valid. Therefore, the revocation of the old will would be undone, and her original will would be reinstated, ensuring her children still inherit.

• Example 2: New Will Invalidated by Undue Influence

  Robert, an elderly widower, had a will that divided his estate among his nieces and nephews. After befriending a new caregiver, he revoked his existing will and signed a new one that left a significant portion of his estate to the caregiver. Following Robert's death, his nieces and nephews challenged the new will, and a court determined it was invalid due to undue influence exerted by the caregiver. In this scenario, the court could apply dependent relative revocation, concluding that Robert's revocation of his original will was conditional on the new will being valid. Since the new will was invalidated, the original will favoring his nieces and nephews would be revived.

• Example 3: Revocation Based on Mistaken Legal Belief

  Sophia had a will that left specific assets to various charities. She decided she wanted her entire estate to go to her only son, believing that if she simply destroyed her will, state intestacy laws (laws governing estates without a will) would automatically ensure her son inherited everything. She then physically destroyed her will. However, Sophia was mistaken; under state law, if she died without a will, a portion of her estate would also go to a distant cousin she barely knew. A court might apply dependent relative revocation, reasoning that Sophia's revocation was conditional on her mistaken belief about intestacy laws. Since her intended outcome (son inheriting everything) would not be achieved by dying intestate, her original will favoring the charities could be revived.