Florida Codicil: How to Change Your Will

What a Codicil Is

A codicil is a separate document that amends your existing will, changing, adding, or removing a specific provision, without rewriting the whole thing. It is the proper way to make a small update, whether swapping an executor, adding a beneficiary, or adjusting a gift. The catch that trips people up is that a codicil must be signed with the exact same formalities as a will. An informal note does not count, and neither does a handwritten (holographic) will or amendment without witnesses. Two witnesses is the number, and a document one witness short is the one mistake Florida courts have no repair tool for. We followed a case where a trust amendment giving away a house failed on exactly that, and everyone in the fight agreed the gift was intended, in the missing second witness.

The Dangerous Shortcut: Writing on Your Will

The shortcut is the part to take seriously. Crossing out a line, writing in a new name, or initialing a change in the margin does not validly change a Florida will. Worse, it can be read as an attempt to revoke part or all of the will, leaving you with something you never intended, or with no valid will at all. If you want to change your will, never mark up the original. Do it with a properly executed codicil or a new will.

A Florida appellate court decided what the markings are worth in 2004, in a case I have read in full. A father signed his will in 1977 and a lawyer-drafted codicil in 1984. Some time before he died in January 2003 he went through the original with a pen, lined out the name of his personal representative, wrote the word delete over paragraphs that no longer applied, added heirs in the margin, and signed a note that said to draw up a new will making all the changes noted. No new will was ever drawn. Two weeks after his death his wife filed the marked-up original, and the probate court threw out the will and the codicil together, which would have sent his estate through the rules for dying without a will. The appeals court reversed, because the pen marks were neither a revocation (he had not burned, torn or destroyed the document with the intent to revoke it) nor an amendment (nothing was signed at the end and no witness saw any of it), so the will and codicil went to probate exactly as he had signed them in 1977 and 1984, with every change he wanted ignored. The instruction he wrote to himself was the plan, and it died with him. A codicil signed the same week, with two witnesses and a notary, would have carried every one of those changes, and the appeal would never have been filed.

How Do You Void a Will Quickly With a Codicil in Florida?

The question I get most about this is, "How do I void my will quickly with a codicil?" A codicil can do it the same afternoon. Florida law revokes a will, or any part of it, by a later will, codicil or other writing that declares the revocation and is signed with the will's formalities, meaning your signature at the end and two witnesses who sign in front of you and each other. Add the notary's self-proving affidavit and the probate court can admit it without tracking the witnesses down. Two things decide whether the quick version is the right version. First, a codicil that revokes the whole will and puts nothing in its place leaves you with no will at all, so Florida's rules for dying without a will decide who inherits until you sign a new one, and a codicil that revokes only one paragraph revokes that paragraph and nothing else. Second, a revocation clause is permanent in a way people do not expect. Once a valid document says it revokes all prior wills and codicils, the earlier documents do not come back if the new plan later fails on a detail, and the experience section at the bottom of this page tells over a case where that cost a family the whole of a trust. If the change is one item, a codicil that says exactly what it revokes and what replaces it is the fast and safe route. If the change is the whole plan, the fast route is a new will signed the same day, so that not one hour passes with no valid will in force.

Codicil or a New Will?

For one small, clean change, a codicil is fine. For anything bigger, or if you already have a codicil or two, it is usually better to sign a new will that restates everything in one clean document. Stacking codicils on an old will breeds contradictions, which is exactly the ambiguity that fuels will contests. Since we draft from a template either way, a fresh will is often just as easy and far cleaner.

When Life Changes

Florida law handles some changes automatically. Divorce voids the gifts in your will to a former spouse, and a new spouse or a child born after your will may gain rights by default. But these rules are blunt and miss most of what you would actually want. A marriage, divorce, birth, or death is the right moment to update your will properly, not to rely on the defaults. See what a Florida will covers →

Frequently Asked Questions

Common Situations

The marked-up will. A widow crossed out one child’s name and wrote in a grandchild. At her death, the changes were invalid and the edits cast doubt on the whole will, sparking a family fight a simple codicil would have avoided.

The clean update. A man wants to change his executor after a falling-out. One properly executed codicil does it, leaving the rest of his will untouched.

The codicil that re-dated the will. A Naples father signed his will before his youngest daughter was born. Florida law would normally treat her as an after-born child entitled to a share, a built-in safety net for kids a will never mentions. Then he signed a codicil to swap his personal representative, and the codicil republished the will, meaning the law can treat the will as re-signed on the codicil’s date, after her birth, which can quietly erase that protection. A codicil is never just the one change on its face; we check every amendment against the family timeline before it is signed.

Sources of Law

• Fla. Stat. §732.502(5) (a codicil must be executed with the same formalities as a will); §732.503 (self-proving). Revocation by act or writing: §732.505-.506; divorce: §732.507. No-contest clauses are unenforceable in Florida (§732.517). (retrieved 2026-06-08)
• Cases: Rosoff v. Harding, 901 So. 2d 1006 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (a valid will with an express revocation clause is not reopened by the doctrine of dependent relative revocation when its exercise of a power of appointment fails); Dahly v. Dahly, 866 So. 2d 745 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004) (pen marks, the word delete and a signed note to draw up a new will are neither a revocation nor an amendment, so the unaltered will and codicil are admitted). Each read in full from the official opinion text (retrieved 2026-09-03).

What a Contested Codicil Shows About Changing a Will

Most planning attorneys never see what happens to a codicil once it is contested. I do. A codicil looks like the smallest document in the file, and in court I have watched it do two large things, because it signs the whole will again as of its own date and it can revoke whatever it says it revokes.

In one case I have reviewed, a Florida woman inherited the use of a trust her brother created in his 1974 will, with the right to say, in her own will or a codicil, who would take what was left of it when she died. Her brother wrote one condition into that right. Any exercise of it signed within 18 months of her death would be invalid unless it was prepared and signed in front of officers of his corporate trustee (he wanted a bank in the room for any deathbed change, which is a reasonable thing for a brother to want). She honored the condition three times over 18 years. Her 1982 will exercised the power with the officers present and a certificate from them attached. A 1983 codicil removed one beneficiary and left the exercise alone, again with the officers present. A 1991 will revoked the earlier documents, exercised the power the same way, and left her nephew the balance. In April 2000, at 95, she signed a third will and a revocable trust with her nephew and a bank as trustees. The will revoked all prior wills and codicils and pointed the power at the new trust, the trust carried the cash gifts and the nephew's remainder, and nobody from her brother's trustee was in the room. She died within the 18 months. A niece, the one surviving person her brother had named to take the trust if the power was never validly exercised, objected, and the court agreed the 2000 exercise failed on the condition her brother had written. The nephew asked the court to revive the 1991 exercise under the doctrine Florida uses when a later will fails, and the Fourth District said no in May 2005, because a valid will with an express revocation clause is not reopened, nothing in the 2000 documents said she would prefer the old exercise if the new one failed, and reviving it would have paid some beneficiaries twice. The balance of her brother's trust went to the niece.

In reading that case against the current chapter 732, I have a few take-home points.

The first is the revocation clause, because it worked exactly as written and that was the problem. The doctrine that brings an old will back applies when the new will fails for a defect in signing, such as one witness instead of two, or when a codicil's gift fails as a matter of law. It does not reach a valid will that says it revokes everything before it, so the careful exercise of 1991 was gone the moment the 2000 will was signed, and the failure of the 2000 exercise did not bring it back. Practice pointer. When a plan depends on a condition someone else wrote, a power of appointment in a parent's or a sibling's will or trust, I draft the new will or codicil around that condition, sign it the way the condition requires, and until that signing happens I leave the earlier document standing rather than revoke it. I also put one sentence in the new document saying that the earlier exercise is to stand if the new one fails, because that is a sentence a Florida court can read, and that will had no such sentence.

Second, the 1983 codicil in that case is the model of what a codicil is for. It removed one beneficiary, changed nothing else, and was signed with the same care as the will it amended, so the exercise it left alone stayed valid for the next eight years. Practice pointer. I use a codicil when the change is one item and every other line must stay exactly as it is, and I move to a new will once the change reaches the structure of the plan, because a codicil signs the whole will again as of its own date, and I read every clause in the will against that date before the client signs. The after-born child in the situations above is the same rule from the other side.

Third, the trust in that case did the ordinary thing and undid the plan. She moved her gifts out of the will and into a revocable trust, which is what many people do at 95 to keep the estate out of probate, and the trust never mentioned her brother's power or made its gifts depend on it. That silence is one of the reasons the court would not revive the old exercise, because the same people would have been paid from both documents. Practice pointer. When I sign a will and a trust with a client on the same day, each one names what the other is doing, and I put the exercise of any power of appointment in the document the power itself requires, in the words the power itself requires. Avoid a codicil or a new will that revokes all prior wills and codicils while the plan still depends on a condition somebody else wrote, because in that family the clause did its job perfectly and the exercise it replaced failed the first time it was tested.

What that mistake cost is the whole balance of a trust that three earlier documents had left to her nephew and the people she named, and five years of litigation over a will signed at 95. The document that would have prevented it was a codicil or a new will signed in the presence of the trustee's officers, which is a phone call and a meeting, or a single sentence preserving the 1991 exercise if the new one failed. I prepare a codicil for a flat fee quoted at consult, a simple will that restates the plan in one clean document is $299, and the will plan is $1,200 for one person and $1,950 for a couple, with the self-proving affidavit included in every one of them.

The opinion never says why the officers were absent in 2000, and the court presumed the omission was unintentional. It also gives no dollar figure for the trust, so the size of the loss is not on the record, only its shape. What I take from the two cases on this page is that the person who signed the document was careful each time, and the document did what its words said rather than what its author meant.

Kevin D. Klagge, Esq., admitted in Florida since 2012. Each case described above is a decision of a Florida court rather than a matter handled by this firm. Past results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Updated on September 3, 2026. Reviewed by Kevin D. Klagge, Esq., Fla. Bar No. 99502. Attorney Kevin Klagge represents families, businesses, and international clients in estate and tax planning, business structuring, and international law, with a focus on Florida legal tools. He litigates estate and business issues in court. General information about Florida law, not legal advice, and no attorney-client relationship is created. Whether to use a codicil or a new will depends on your situation. Do not send confidential information until we have agreed to represent you.