If, after the making of any will, the testator executes a second will, the destruction, cancellation or revocation of the second will does not revive the first will, unless it appears by the terms of the revocation that it was the intention to revive and give effect to the first will, or unless, after the destruction, cancellation or revocation, the first will is reexecuted. 133.140 Agreements of testator. A bond, covenant or agreement made by a testator to convey any property devised in any will previously made is not a revocation of the previous devise, but the property passes by the devise, subject to the same remedies on the bond, covenant or agreement, for the specific performance or otherwise, against the devisee, as might be had by law against the heirs of the testator, if the property had descended to them. 133.150 Charges or encumbrances upon estate. A charge or encumbrance upon any estate, for the purpose of securing the payment of money, or the performance of any covenant or agreement, is not a revocation of a will relating to the same estate which was previously executed, but the devises therein contained pass subject to the charge or encumbrance.
Specific devise passes subject to mortgage or lien existing on date of death.
A specific devise passes subject to any mortgage or lien existing on the date of death, without right of exoneration, regardless of a general directive in the will to pay debts. NRS 133.160 Rights of child born after making of will by parent of child. When a child is born after the making of a will by a parent of that child and no provision is made for the child in the will, the child is entitled to the same share in the estate of the testator as if the testator had died intestate, unless it is apparent from the will that it was the intention of the testator that no provision should be made for that child. When the child of a testator or the issue of a deceased child of a testator is omitted from the testator s will, it must be presumed that the omission was intentional. Should the court find that the omission was unintentional, the child, or the issue of the deceased child, is entitled to the same share in the estate of the testator as if the testator had died intestate.