- 22 -
(b) An express revocation is effected when the
maker by writing or action annuls the instrument. It
takes effect instantly, independently of the validity
or ultimate fate of the will or other instrument
containing the revocation.
(c) An implied revocation results from the
execution of a subsequent inconsistent will. It takes
effect only when the subsequent inconsistent will
becomes effectual. If, from any cause, the subsequent
inconsistent will fails, the implied revocation is not
completed.
Ga. Code Ann. section 53-2-73(a) (1997) then further provides:
“An express revocation by written instrument shall be executed
with the same formality and attested by the same number of
witnesses as are requisite for the execution of a will.”
Applying these principles to the matter at bar, we first
conclude that no implied revocation has occurred. If Mr.
Lassiter in fact executed a will or codicil merely inconsistent
with the disposition in the 1970 will, but not explicitly
revoking the earlier instrument, such revocation has never been
completed because the later document, having been lost or
destroyed without a trace, never became effectual.
We thus turn to whether the estate’s statements are
sufficient to establish an express revocation under Georgia law,
and we again conclude that they are not. As regards the type of
proof necessary to show express revocation, the Supreme Court of
Georgia explained in Driver v. Sheffield, 85 S.E.2d 766, 767 (Ga.
1955):
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011