## Facts

- Steve J. Pilafas executed a written, revocable inter vivos trust and a will.
- On August 30, 1982, he created and immediately funded the trust by transferring real and personal property to himself as trustee, including real estate and secured notes; additional assets were later added.
- During life, the trust directed payment of income and any principal the settlor requested in writing; at death, it provided distributions to charities and family trusts, and expressly omitted provisions for three children.
- The trust’s revocation clause allowed revocation or amendment only “by instrument in writing delivered to the Trustee,” and made the power personal to the settlor.
- Pilafas amended the trust twice using written instruments consistent with the trust’s stated method.
- After Pilafas’s death, despite a diligent search of his home and meticulous records, the original will and original trust documents could not be located.
- Petitioners sought rulings that both the will and trust were revoked, resulting in intestacy; remainder beneficiaries (charities and certain family members) contested, especially as to the trust.

## Issues

1. Whether the missing original will, after diligent search, supported the presumption that the testator revoked it by destruction with intent to revoke.
2. Whether a revocable inter vivos trust was revoked when the original trust documents were missing, despite a revocation clause requiring a written instrument delivered to the trustee and no proof of such a writing.

## Decision

- The court affirmed the determination that the will was revoked under the common-law presumption applicable to missing wills last known to be in the testator’s possession.
- The court reversed the determination that the inter vivos trust was revoked because revocation required compliance with the trust’s specified method, and no written revocation delivered to the trustee was shown.
- Disposition: affirmed in part (will revoked) and reversed in part (trust not revoked).

## Legal Principles

- A will is presumed revoked when it was last known to be in the testator’s possession and cannot be found among the testator’s effects at death after a diligent search; the presumption supports a finding of revocation absent sufficient contrary proof.
- When a settlor reserves a power to revoke a trust in a particular manner and under specified circumstances, the settlor may revoke only in that stated manner and under those circumstances.
- The missing-will presumption does not automatically apply to a funded inter vivos trust with an express revocation procedure; absent compliance with the required written, delivered revocation, the trust remains effective.

## Conclusion

The court treated the missing will and missing trust documents differently: the will’s absence supported a presumption of revocation, but the trust remained valid because the settlor did not revoke it through the written, delivered method required by the trust instrument.


In re Estate & Trust of Pilafas, 172 Ariz. 207, 836 P.2d 420 (Ct. App. 1992)