Our client came to us following the death of a loved one, hoping to validate a will that had been prepared using a nontraditional format, a Five Wishes document. The document reflected the decedent’s clear intent, and two witnesses were available to testify to its authenticity.

We were well-prepared for the hearing and presented testimony from the two witnesses who were available. A third witness was ready to speak about the decedent’s intent, but the court did not permit their testimony due to a procedural issue. We explained that the document still met the legal requirements for a valid will because it was signed by the client and at least two witnesses. Even without a notary or a self-proving affidavit, it remained legally sufficient. We also clarified that the witnesses were only remotely related to the decedent and were signing in their roles as health care surrogates.

In the end, the judge ruled that the will was not valid, mainly because it didn’t have some of the usual formalities, like a notary stamp or a self-proving affidavit. The court didn’t give much weight to the part of the law that allows a will to be valid even if it doesn’t follow a strict format. The judge was also concerned that the witnesses signed underneath a statement about being related to the decedent, even though their connection was very distant and they were really signing in their role as health care surrogates. We explained the client’s options for appealing the decision and discussed what the next steps would look like.

This case shows how risky it can be to rely on nontraditional or informal estate planning documents, even when someone’s wishes are clear and the legal requirements are technically met. Going forward, we recommend that clients use a formally drafted will and make sure all standard procedures are followed to avoid these issues.