## Facts

- Russell G. Ranney executed a written instrument intended as his will consisting of four dispositive pages and a separate fifth page titled “Acknowledgment and Affidavit Relating to Execution of Will.”
- The pages were not numbered or physically attached before execution.
- At the law office execution ceremony, Ranney signed the dispositive pages in the presence of two individuals intended to serve as witnesses.
- The two witnesses and a notary then signed only the separate self-proving affidavit page; the witnesses did not sign the dispositive pages of the will.
- The self-proving affidavit recited that Ranney had executed the instrument as his will and that the witnesses had signed the will as witnesses.
- After Ranney’s death, the Surrogate admitted the instrument to probate; the widow objected solely on execution-formality grounds, not alleging fraud, undue influence, or lack of testamentary intent.

## Issues

1. Whether witness signatures appearing only on a separate self-proving affidavit satisfy the statutory requirement that witnesses “sign the will.”
2. If not, whether the instrument may nevertheless be admitted to probate under a substantial-compliance doctrine based on clear and convincing evidence of testamentary intent and fulfillment of the purposes of execution formalities.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of New Jersey held that signatures on a separate self-proving affidavit do not literally satisfy the statutory requirement that witnesses sign the will.
- The court adopted a substantial-compliance doctrine for wills: a document may be probated despite a formal defect if proponents prove by clear and convincing evidence that the decedent intended it as a will and that the execution substantially served the purposes of the statutory formalities.
- The court affirmed the disposition allowing further proceedings and remanded for a plenary hearing to determine whether substantial compliance was established on the facts.

## Legal Principles

- A self-proving affidavit and a witness attestation clause serve different functions: the affidavit provides evidentiary convenience in probate, while witness signatures on the will evidence due execution.
- Statutory authorization for a separate self-proving affidavit contemplates its use with a duly executed will and does not eliminate the requirement that witnesses sign the will itself.
- A will that fails strict compliance with execution formalities may be admitted to probate upon clear and convincing proof of (1) the testator’s intent that the document operate as a will and (2) execution that substantially fulfills the protective purposes of the formal requirements (reliability, authenticity, and safeguards against fraud, mistake, and uncertainty).
- Technical defects attributable to execution mechanics or lawyer error do not automatically defeat probate when the statutory purposes are otherwise satisfied.

## Conclusion

The court rejected the view that witness signatures on a separate self-proving affidavit literally satisfy the requirement that witnesses sign the will, but held that probate may still be available under substantial compliance when clear and convincing evidence shows the document was intended as the testator’s will and the execution procedure substantially achieved the purposes of the will-execution statutes.


In re Will of Ranney, 124 N.J. 1, 589 A.2d 1339 (N.J. 1991)