It is a good thing if you have done your last will and testament to make sure your loved ones will be taken care of after your death.  However, circumstances (or your mind) may change and you may decide to amend your will.  A Mississippi court case revealed why you should NOT do so by writing on your original will document.
Following the death of Lura Carpenter, her three surviving children – Bobby Dean Carpenter, Jerry Wayne Carpenter, and Nancy Lynn Carpenter Dempsey – filed a petition to probate Lura’s will, which contained several handwritten interlineations and markings.  Autumn Cosby, the daughter of Lura’s deceased child, challenged the probate of the will claiming that the handwritten markings showed that Autumn was to receive her deceased parent’s share of the estate.  The chancellor found that, based upon the handwritten changes to the will, Lura’s original will was totally revoked and that Autumn should inherit a child’s share through the laws of intestate (without a will) inheritance.  Bobby appealed this decision.
Bobby argued that the handwritten additions to Lura’s will were invalid as they were not witnessed by two or more witnesses are required by state law.  The judge had, indeed, found the markings to be a violation of the statute and, therefore, invalid.
The question arose whether Lura effectively revoked part or all of her will by the markings.  State law authorizes the total or partial revocation of a will by either cancellation or obliteration of its terms.  A testator who wishes to revoke a will may do so by either destroying, canceling, or obliterating the will, or by executing a subsequent will or codicil that is properly witnessed and signed.  It is essential to the revocation that the testator have the intent to revoke the will.  Neither party disputed that Lura intended some sort of revocation; rather, the issue was the extent of the revocation.
Bobby argued that the handwritten interlineations in Lura’s will were merely evidence of her intent to partially revoke those portions of the will, not a complete revocation of the will.  Autumn argued for a complete revocation of all the paragraphs that contained interlineations and additions, leaving Lura’s real property and some small portions of personal property to descend intestate.  The appeal court found that the chancellor had erred in her holding that Lura revoked her entire will and sent the case back to the trial court to determine whether Autumn would have received any bequests under the deleted portions of the original will.
CARPENTER v. COSBY, NO. 2009-CA-00114-COA
http://www.mssc.state.ms.us/Images/Opinions/CO63256.pdf 
This tragic family conflict could have been avoided if Lura had obtained proper legal counsel about how to make the changes she desired.
For the right legal help with amending your will, trust or other legal documents, contact us online or call us today at 601-987-3000.