Thompson v. Royall

M. Lou Bowen Kroll executed a will and later a codicil, both properly signed and attested; days after the codicil, she asked her executor and attorney to destroy both documents, but her attorney instead suggested keeping the will as a drafting memorandum and wrote a notation on the back cover of the will and codicil stating each was null and void, retained only as a memorandum, which Kroll signed. Kroll died without ever executing a new will, and after some beneficiaries sought to probate the original documents, a jury found the will and codicil were still enforceable as Kroll's last will; the trial court sustained that verdict, and the appeal reached the Virginia Supreme Court on the argument that the notations effectively cancelled the will as the revocation statute required.