To revive an earlier will after a later will revoked it, which methods are valid?

• A. Codicil incorporating the earlier provisions by reference; or a revival writing; or re-execution and re-attestation.
• B. Merely revoking the later will revives the earlier one.
• C. The court must order revival.
• D. Destroying both wills automatically revives the earlier one.

Answer: (A)

Revival of an earlier will after a later will has revoked it requires an affirmative action by the testator to show clear intent to bring the earlier will back into effect. It isn’t automatic just because the later will was revoked; the prior provisions must be re-expressed in a valid form or re-established through proper execution.

Under New York law, the valid ways to accomplish revival are: a codicil that incorporates the earlier provisions by reference, so the earlier will’s terms are brought back into the dispositive scheme; or a separate revival writing that explicitly revives the earlier will; or re-execution and re-attestation of the earlier will, giving it fresh validity under the formal execution requirements. Each path provides clear evidence of the testator’s intent to revive the earlier will and meets the formalities for updating or reaffirming a will.

Why the other ideas don’t fit: simply revoking the later will does not automatically restore the earlier one; there must be an affirmative act. A court cannot order revival as a routine remedy in this context. Destroying both wills does not automatically revive the earlier will and could leave the estate without a valid will.