How to Revoke a Will in Hawaii

     Sometimes a situation arises where a person passes away with multiple Wills and it may be unclear which Will is valid.  If there is uncertainty regarding which Will controls and the disposition of the estate varies significantly from one Will to another, the potential for a Will dispute or challenge increases dramatically.  Therefore, it is useful to know how to effectively revoke a Will to ensure that there is no confusion about which Will controls upon your death.
     In Hawaii, Hawaii Revised Statutes Section 560:2-507 details how a Will may be revoked, whether in whole or in part.  The methods a person may use to revoke a Will are as follows:  
     Method #1:  Execute a subsequent Will.  Having the most recently executed Will state unequivocally that all prior Wills are revoked is probably the cleanest way of revoking a Will aside from shredding the original and copies of any prior Wills.   
     Method #2:  Performing a physical, revocatory act.  Hawaii Revised Statutes Section 560:2-507(a)(2) states that a person may perform an act with the intent and purpose of revoking the Will to effectuate the revocation.  This "revocatory act" may include doing the following to the Will:

• Burning
• Tearing
• Canceling
• Obliterating 
• Destroying

     If the testator cannot perform the physical, revocatory act himself, another person may perform the act in the "conscious presence" of the testator and at the direction of the testator.
     Method #3:  Implied Revocation.  If a subsequent Will fails to expressly revoke prior Wills, Hawaii Revised Statutes Section 560:2-507(b) states that the previous Will may still be revoked by way of inconsistency IF the person intended the subsequent Will to replace rather than supplement the prior Will.    
     According to Hawaii Revised Statutes Section 560:2-507(c), there is a presumption that a subsequent Will replaces a prior Will in its entirety if the latest Will makes a complete disposition of the estate.  This presumption may be overcome by "clear and convincing evidence".   
     HOWEVER, if the subsequent Will did NOT dispose of the entire estate, then the presumption is reversed (Hawaii Revised Statutes Section 560:2-507(d)).  As before, the presumption came be overcome by "clear and convincing" evidence.  Courts are generally reluctant to consider a subsequent Will as a complete replacement of a prior Will if the subsequent Will does not dispose of the entire estate.  In that instance, the court would likely treat the subsequent Will as a "codicil", which is a supplement to a prior Will.  The subsequent Will would only replace the prior Will where there are inconsistencies and both Wills would be effective to the extent they are in agreement.