Flashcards Studio

In 2020, Ingrid validly executed Will One, leaving her estate to her niece, Nora. In 2023, Ingrid validly executed Will Two, stating, "I revoke all prior wills and leave my estate to City Hospital." In 2025, after a disagreement with the hospital, Ingrid wrote on a sticky note, "I am tearing up the hospital will so Nora gets everything again," and then tore Will Two into several pieces. Ingrid did not re-sign Will One or execute another will.
After Ingrid died, Nora offered Will One for probate. The hospital argues that Will Two revoked Will One and that destruction of Will Two caused intestacy, not revival of Will One. Ingrid's heirs argue that neither will controls. The state follows UPC-style revival rules that consider the testator's intent shown by the circumstances and statements surrounding revocation.
Who should receive Ingrid's estate? Discuss revocation of Will One, revocation of Will Two, revival, and dependent relative revocation.