Representative Image (AI-generated) A handwritten will can offer a simple way to distribute property after death, but who actually writes its contents can determine whether it is legally valid. In Nebraska, a dispute over a two-page handwritten document has ended with the state Supreme Court ruling that a man's signature was not enough to make the document a valid will when its important provisions had been written by someone else.In its October 30, 2026, opinion, available on Justia, the Nebraska Supreme Court upheld a lower court's ruling that a 2021 document could not replace Douglas G. Todd's original 1984 will. The dispute involved his longtime unmarried partner, Judy Sheets, who claimed that Todd had instructed her to write the document and had signed and dated it himself. However, she acknowledged that the material provisions were in her handwriting. The court held that this did not satisfy Nebraska's requirements for a handwritten, or holographic, will. A decades-long relationship and two competing wills The case arose after Douglas Todd died in January 2025. His son, Chadd B. Todd, subsequently applied for informal probate of a will Douglas had signed in 1984. Under that document, Douglas had directed that all his property would go to his sons. However, Judy Sheets challenged the application, arguing that the 1984 document was no longer his last will. She claimed that Douglas had subsequently executed a two-page handwritten will in February 2021, leaving his estate to her.Sheets testified that she and Douglas had been in a long-term relationship for more than four decades, although they had never married. They had lived together as a couple until his death. She maintained that Douglas had personally signed and dated the 2021 document after telling her what to write. However, she acknowledged during her deposition that the remaining contents, including the provisions explaining how the property should be distributed, were entirely in her handwriting. The distinction became central to the probate dispute because several assets, including real estate and motor vehicles, were still titled solely in Douglas' name when he died.Both sides filed competing motions for summary judgment before the County Court for Lincoln County. The court ruled in favour of Chadd, finding that the 2021 document was not a valid holographic will because its material provisions were not written by Douglas. It also determined, as an alternative reason, that the document did not adequately express testamentary intent. Sheets appealed. Why the handwritten document failed Nebraska's legal requirements The Nebraska Supreme Court focused on the state's rules governing holographic wills. Under Nebraska Revised Statute Section 30-2328, a document that does not meet the usual requirements for a witnessed will may still be recognised as a holographic will, whether or not it is witnessed, if the testator's signature and material provisions are handwritten and the document includes a handwritten indication of the date of signing. The statute also provides limited exceptions where no date is indicated. This exception allows people to prepare wills without the formalities normally required for witnessed documents. However, it does not remove the requirement that the person making the will must write its essential provisions.Sheets argued that the 2021 document qualified because it was intended to be a joint will, meaning a testamentary document made by two people. She contended that both she and Douglas were testators, and therefore the handwriting requirement could be satisfied through her written contributions. The Supreme Court rejected this interpretation. It explained that a joint will, although contained in one document, effectively represents the separate wills of the individuals who sign it. Each person's wishes are treated as a separate testamentary disposition, and the document must be considered independently when one of the people dies.Consequently, even if the 2021 document represented both Sheets' and Douglas' wishes, only Douglas' individual will could be admitted in the probate proceedings concerning his estate. Since Douglas was the person whose property was being distributed after his death, the material provisions of the will offered for probate on his behalf had to be in his handwriting. Sheets' handwriting could not fulfil that requirement, even if she had accurately recorded the instructions he gave her. Court explains the purpose of holographic will rules The Supreme Court also considered decisions from other jurisdictions involving similar disputes over jointly prepared handwritten wills. It referred to earlier cases in which courts had concluded that a document written primarily by one person could not qualify as the holographic will of another person simply because the latter had signed it.The court noted that this interpretation was consistent with the purpose behind laws recognising handwritten wills. Holographic wills provide a relatively simple and inexpensive alternative to formally witnessed documents. However, requiring the testator to write the material provisions personally helps protect against fraud and provides an additional safeguard that the document reflects that person's actual wishes. Allowing someone else's handwriting to satisfy this requirement would weaken that protection, the court reasoned.The judges therefore concluded that the 2021 document could not be treated as Douglas' valid holographic will. Because this finding was sufficient to resolve the dispute, the Supreme Court did not need to examine the lower court's alternative conclusion about whether the document expressed testamentary intent. Nebraska Supreme Court upholds the earlier ruling The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed the County Court for Lincoln County's decision, leaving the 2021 handwritten document invalid as Douglas' holographic will. The ruling means that the document cannot supersede his 1984 will in the probate proceedings. The ruling leaves the 1984 will as the document governing the probate proceedings, under which Douglas had directed that his property go to his sons. The decision does not determine every possible issue concerning the estate or independently establish the ownership of each asset. It resolves the specific legal question of whether the 2021 document satisfied Nebraska's requirements for a holographic will.