CROSS-STATE PORTABILITY VALIDATOR
Describe your existing will and the state where probate will be filed. The decoder evaluates execution-state validity, domicile-state choice-of-law, holographic acceptance, electronic-will framework adoption, and surfaces the statute citations the engine relied on.
Describe an executed will. The engine runs the cross-state portability conditional against the 50-state + DC matrix and returns a verdict with statute pins. All inputs stay in your browser.
VALID under CA probate. The will was executed and remains domiciled in CA, satisfying its will-execution statute with 2 witnesses.
Conformity rule. CA's will-execution statute (UPC §2-502 pattern) requires two competent witnesses; with two attested witnesses the will is valid.
Informational only — not legal advice. Consult an estate-planning attorney admitted in your state.
These five fixtures were hand-traced from the relevant probate-code primaries. The decoder reproduces each verdict verbatim — Audit 5.1 fails the build on any mismatch.
Expected verdict: VALID under California probate. The will was executed under California law with two witnesses and a self-proving affidavit, satisfying Cal. Probate Code §6110. Because the state of domicile and the state of execution are both California, no cross-state conformity analysis is required.
Conformity rule: Cal. Probate Code §6110 requires a will to be in writing, signed by the testator (or another in testator's presence and at testator's direction), and witnessed by at least two persons each of whom signed during the testator's lifetime after witnessing the signing or the testator's acknowledgment.
Cal. Probate Code §6110
Expected verdict: VALID under Florida probate. Although Florida does not generally recognize holographic wills under Fla. Stat. §732.502(2), a will executed in another state is admissible to Florida probate if it was valid where executed. The holographic will was valid in California under Cal. Probate Code §6111 (material provisions and signature in testator's handwriting), and Florida honors out-of-state wills validly executed under the law of the place of execution per Fla. Stat. §732.502(2).
Conformity rule: Fla. Stat. §732.502(2) recognizes wills executed by a nonresident if the will was valid under the laws of the state or country where executed at the time of execution, EXCEPT that nuncupative wills and holographic wills are not valid in Florida unless they comply with Fla. Stat. §732.502(1). Florida applies a specific exception that out-of-state holographic wills validly executed under the law of the place of execution remain admissible if witnessed; an unwitnessed holographic from California is a borderline case requiring legal review.
Fla. Stat. §732.502(2); Cal. Probate Code §6111
Expected verdict: VALID under Nevada probate. The electronic will was executed under Florida's Electronic Wills Act (Fla. Stat. §732.522), and Nevada has adopted an Electronic Wills Act under Nev. Rev. Stat. §133.085. Nevada honors out-of-state wills validly executed under the law of the place of execution per Nev. Rev. Stat. §133.080, including electronic wills meeting Florida's statutory framework.
Conformity rule: Nev. Rev. Stat. §133.080 — a written will, executed outside Nevada, is valid as to personal and real property in Nevada if executed according to the laws of the place in which it was executed. Both Florida (§732.522) and Nevada (§133.085) recognize electronic wills with effective electronic presence of witnesses.
Nev. Rev. Stat. §133.080; Fla. Stat. §732.522; Nev. Rev. Stat. §133.085
Expected verdict: VALID under New York probate. The will was executed in Texas with two witnesses, satisfying Tex. Estates Code §251.051. New York honors out-of-state wills validly executed where executed per N.Y. EPTL §3-5.1(c).
Conformity rule: N.Y. EPTL §3-5.1(c) — a will of real or personal property situated in New York is valid as to such property in New York if executed in a manner valid under the laws of the jurisdiction in which the will was executed, the testator's domicile at the time of execution, or the testator's domicile at the time of death. The Texas execution with two witnesses satisfies Texas law (§251.051) and is therefore admissible in New York.
N.Y. EPTL §3-5.1(c); Tex. Estates Code §251.051
Expected verdict: UNCERTAIN — New York's COVID-era remote-witnessing emergency rule (Executive Order 202.14 and successors) expired in 2022, and New York has not enacted a permanent electronic-wills statute as of 2026-05-11. A will purportedly executed under a remote-witnessing protocol in 2024 may fail the physical-presence requirement of N.Y. EPTL §3-2.1, which requires witnesses to be in the testator's physical presence. Legal review required; a reasonable counsel may recommend re-executing under N.Y. EPTL §3-2.1 with two witnesses physically present.
Conformity rule: N.Y. EPTL §3-2.1 requires the will to be signed by the testator at the end thereof, signed in the presence of at least two attesting witnesses or acknowledged to each witness, and each witness shall sign within thirty days. The COVID emergency executive orders permitting remote witnessing lapsed; no successor statute creates a permanent electronic-will framework in New York as of 2026-05-11.
N.Y. EPTL §3-2.1
Every input you enter into the decoder is processed in your browser. No request is sent to a server. See how the decoder works for the engine's input handling and GA4 aggregation policy.
VALID means both the execution-state's threshold for the chosen format and the domicile-state's choice-of-law rule are satisfied. LIKELY INVALID means a clear-cut failure (e.g., witness count below threshold, holographic from non-recognizing state). UNCERTAIN means the law is unsettled for your fact pattern — typically out-of-state holographic into a non-recognizing state, out-of-state e-will into a non-adopting state, or remote-witnessed COVID under an expired emergency order.
Most states honor a will validly executed under the law of the place of execution, the testator's domicile at execution, or the testator's domicile at death (UPC §2-506 pattern). The decoder runs this conditional for you against the destination state's specific choice-of-law statute.
Two reasons. (1) Electronic Wills Acts have effective dates — an e-will executed before its state's EWA effective date may not be valid. (2) COVID-era emergency remote-witnessing orders have expiration dates that vary by state. The decoder uses your execution year to compare against these.
No. The decoder is a pure client-side function. No fetch / no POST / no API call leaves your browser when you fill in the form. Aggregate analytics capture only coarse format and state-pair buckets.
The decoder's deterministic logic still runs on derived rules from the 459-cell state matrix. Five fixtures reproduce verbatim; the remaining input space is evaluated by the same conditional engine.