Scribd
Upload
14 views2 pages

Understanding Dependent Relevant Revocation

The doctrine of dependent relative revocation (DRR) holds that if a testator revokes a will while under the mistaken belief that a new will would be valid, but the new will is invalid, the old will can be reinstated. DRR is based on the idea that the testator only wanted to revoke the old will on the condition that the new will was valid. DRR applies when there is clear evidence the testator did not intend to die intestate and only revoked the prior will because they mistakenly believed the new will would be legally effective. However, DRR does not apply to restore a gift that was decreased in the new will, as the testator's intent in that case was to revoke

Uploaded by

Stacy Mustang
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
14 views2 pages

Understanding Dependent Relevant Revocation

The doctrine of dependent relative revocation (DRR) holds that if a testator revokes a will while under the mistaken belief that a new will would be valid, but the new will is invalid, the old will can be reinstated. DRR is based on the idea that the testator only wanted to revoke the old will on the condition that the new will was valid. DRR applies when there is clear evidence the testator did not intend to die intestate and only revoked the prior will because they mistakenly believed the new will would be legally effective. However, DRR does not apply to restore a gift that was decreased in the new will, as the testator's intent in that case was to revoke

Uploaded by

Stacy Mustang
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

If a person owns real property in a different state then the one they are domiciled at death &

dies intestate, the intestacy scheme of two different states may come in to play

Example: Gift for $1000 made to beneficiary A, cancelling=draw a line through 1 of the 0
reduce that gift to $100 sending an additional $900 into the residue.

Example: Gift is $3000 to A,B&C testator cannot draw line through name(B) & increase
gift to A&B to $1500 each instead they keep original share of $1000. $1000 that supposed
to go to B go to residuary clause, no residuary clause, pass through intestate succession.

Dependent relevant revocation (DRR - also known as ineffective revocation) is a


doctrine renders revocation of previous will invalid if testator did so by executing
new will, & newly executed will=invalid.
Previous will revived when new will that revoked former will is=invalid. Without
DRR, both wills would=invalid & testator's property passthrough intestacy.
The theory behind (DRR) is that the testator revoked the first will only on the
condition that the second will was valid. The DRR doctrine is predicated on two
tenets:

1. The decedent did not want to pass away without a will, and
2. The decedent revoked the prior will under the condition that the new will be
valid.

("DRR") is a equitable doctrine. Under DRR, courts may


disregard revocation based on mistake of law on part of
testator as to effect of revocation. Courts require testator
recited their mistake in terms of revoking instrument, or
mistake established by clear &convincing evidence

DRR applied to restore gifts erroneously struck from will if


intent of testator was to enlarge gift, not apply to restore
gift if intent was to revoke gift to favor another person.

if new will is not valid, a court may apply the doctrine to


reinstate and probate the old will, if the court holds that
the testator would prefer the old will to intestate
succession.

the doctrine of relative revocation will not apply if the


interlineation decreases the amount of the gift from the
original provision

Example: Testator mistakenly believes that an earlier will can be revived by revocation
of later will, court will ignore later revocation if later will comes closer to fulfilling
testator's intent than not having a will. DRR applies when testator executes 2nd/new will
& revokes old will(mistaken) belief new will would be valid.
Example: Toms will that bequeaths $5,000 to secretary, Alice. Tom crosses out clause &
writes "$7,000 to Alice " in margin, does not sign or date writing in margin,

most states: find Tom had revoked earlier provision,not effectively amended will to add
2nd ;
DRR revocation would be undone- acting under mistaken belief could increase gift $7k
by writing in margin. Therefore, Alice will get $5k.

DRR-not apply-interlineation original gift decreases amount


(e.g: $5k to Alice-crossed out, replaced: $3k to Alice) without Testator's signature or date
in margin; DRR does not apply & Alice will take nothing.

Tom crosses out clause & writes in margin "$5k to Betty" without signing or dating, gift
to Alice= effectively revoked.

Not restored under DRR. Tom was mistaken about effectiveness of gift to Betty, mistake
not affect Tom's intent to revoke gift to Alice.
Gift to Betty=invalid for lack of proper execution.
$5k go to Tom's residuary estate.

You might also like