Yes, in nearly all situations, co-executors are legally required to act jointly. This means they must agree on every significant decision before taking action on behalf of an estate.
The primary problem this creates stems from a fundamental legal principle: the rule of unanimity. Most state probate laws treat co-executors as a single legal entity, requiring them to act in complete agreement to provide a system of checks and balances. This safeguard, however, directly conflicts with the messy reality of human relationships and logistics, often leading to a complete standstill—or “deadlock”—in the estate administration process. When two people with equal power cannot agree, nothing moves forward, and the estate’s assets and the beneficiaries’ inheritances are left in limbo.
This issue is far from rare; disagreements among co-executors, particularly siblings, are a leading cause of estate litigation. These legal battles can become incredibly costly, with one notable case study showing legal fees consuming more than half of the estate’s primary asset’s value.1 The emotional cost, which fractures families permanently, is often even higher.
Here is what you will learn to navigate this complex role and protect your family’s legacy:
- 🤝 You will understand the single most important rule that forces co-executors to agree and the critical reason why this law exists.
- ⚖️ You will discover how to break a deadlock and resolve disagreements without the time, expense, and emotional damage of a court battle.
- 🥊 You will learn the three most common fights co-executors have—over property, money, and responsibilities—and find clear solutions for each.
- ✍️ You will identify the specific “magic words” a person can include in their will to grant one co-executor tie-breaking power, avoiding future stalemates.
- 🛡️ You will find out exactly how to protect yourself and the estate from a co-executor’s bad decisions, negligence, or deliberate misconduct.
The Core of the Conflict: Understanding the Mandate for Unanimous Action
An executor is the person named in a will to carry out the final wishes of the person who passed away, known as the testator. This role is not just a title; it is a fiduciary duty, which is the highest standard of care under the law.2 It legally obligates the executor to act solely in the best interests of the estate and its beneficiaries, putting their own needs and opinions aside.
When a testator names two or more people to share this role, they become co-executors. The law does not see them as two separate individuals who can divide the work. Instead, it views them as a single, unified entity that must speak with one voice and act with one mind on all significant matters.4
This requirement for unanimous action is the default rule across the United States. The logic behind it is to protect the estate. By forcing co-executors to agree, the law creates a powerful check-and-balance system designed to prevent a single rogue executor from making a rash, dishonest, or foolish decision that could drain the estate’s assets.5
The unintended consequence of this safeguard is that it gives each co-executor absolute veto power. If one person says “no,” the action cannot proceed. This dynamic is the root cause of administrative paralysis, turning a well-intentioned appointment into a source of conflict and delay.
The Weight of Shared Responsibility: Understanding Joint Liability
Perhaps the most critical and least understood aspect of being a co-executor is the concept of joint liability. Because the law requires you to act together, it also holds you responsible for each other’s actions—and mistakes.6 This means if your co-executor mismanages funds, fails to pay taxes, or engages in self-dealing, you can both be held personally liable for the financial damage to the estate.
This isn’t a 50/50 split of blame. Each co-executor can be held 100% responsible for the total loss. This legal reality creates an affirmative duty for you to actively monitor your co-executor’s activities.9 You cannot simply assume they are handling their part correctly; you must verify it.
If you become aware of any misconduct, you have a legal obligation to report it to the probate court.10 Staying silent can be interpreted as complicity, putting your personal assets at risk. This shared risk underscores why open communication and meticulous record-keeping are not just best practices—they are essential acts of self-preservation.
How State Laws Shape Co-Executor Powers: A National Overview with Local Rules
While the principle of joint action is the national standard, the specific rules governing co-executors are dictated by state law. These local statutes can create important differences in how co-executors operate, especially concerning real estate and the ability of a will to grant independent powers. Understanding your state’s specific framework is crucial.
Most states, including New York, Florida, Illinois, Pennsylvania, and Ohio, follow a strict unanimity rule as the default.11 In these states, co-executors must act together on all substantive matters unless the will contains explicit language authorizing them to act independently or by a majority vote.4 Without such a provision, every check, deed, and tax return requires all signatures.
Texas stands out with a unique hybrid system. The Texas Estates Code allows a single co-executor’s action to be valid for most administrative tasks, as if all had acted jointly.17 However, it carves out a critical exception for the sale or transfer of real estate. For any property conveyance, all co-executors must sign the deed unless a court specifically authorizes fewer to act.17
California law also defaults to requiring joint action. However, the California Probate Code explicitly allows a testator to include a provision in their will that grants a person the power to designate a co-executor.18 If the will is silent, co-executors (referred to as “personal representatives” in the state) must act unanimously.19
| State | Default Rule on Joint Action | Can a Will Authorize Independent Action? | Special Rule for Real Estate |
| New York | Unanimity Required 4 | Yes, if explicitly stated in the will.4 | Unanimity Required |
| Texas | One can act for all (with exceptions) 17 | Yes (default rule allows it) | Unanimity is mandatory unless a court orders otherwise.17 |
| California | Unanimity Required 19 | Yes, if explicitly stated in the will.18 | Unanimity Required |
| Florida | Unanimity Required 13 | Yes, if explicitly stated in the will. | Unanimity Required |
| Illinois | Unanimity Required 15 | Yes, if explicitly stated in the will. | Unanimity Required |
| Pennsylvania | Unanimity Required 14 | No, joint action is the standard. | Unanimity Required |
| Ohio | Unanimity Required 12 | Yes, if explicitly stated in the will.20 | Unanimity Required |
The Three Most Common Co-Executor Battlegrounds (and How to Win the War)
Disagreements between co-executors are rarely about legal statutes; they are about money, memories, and control. These conflicts typically erupt in three predictable areas. Understanding them is the first step toward preventing or resolving them.
Scenario 1: The Fight Over the Family Home
The family home is often an estate’s most valuable asset, both financially and emotionally. One co-executor may want to sell the house quickly to access cash and finalize the estate. The other may want to hold onto the property, believing the market will improve, or may want to make costly repairs first to increase its value.21
The situation becomes even more explosive if one of the co-executors or another beneficiary is living in the home. This creates a direct conflict of interest, as their personal desire to remain in the property clashes with their fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of all beneficiaries.1 This exact scenario led to a six-year legal battle in the case of Wise v Barry, where one co-executor’s refusal to sell the home he was living in ultimately led to his removal by the court and a court order forcing the sale.1
| Sibling A’s Position | Sibling B’s Position |
| “We need to sell Mom’s house now. The market is decent, and the beneficiaries need their inheritance. We can sell it ‘as is’ and be done.” | “If we just invest $20,000 in a new kitchen and wait until spring, we could get a much higher price. It’s our duty to maximize the value.” |
| Underlying Goal: Speed and finality. | Underlying Goal: Maximizing financial return. |
| The Consequence of Deadlock: The house sits empty, incurring costs for taxes, insurance, and maintenance. Beneficiaries grow frustrated with the delay, and the relationship between the siblings becomes strained, potentially leading to costly court intervention. |
Scenario 2: The Clash Over Cash and Investments
Co-executors often have vastly different ideas about how to manage the estate’s liquid assets, such as cash and investment accounts. This conflict stems from differing levels of financial literacy and risk tolerance.9
One co-executor, fearing loss, might insist on keeping all funds in a low-yield savings account. The other, understanding the “prudent investor” rule, may argue that their duty requires them to invest the funds in a diversified portfolio to generate income and growth for the beneficiaries.24 Without a clear directive in the will, this disagreement over what is “prudent” can lead to a stalemate where the estate’s money stagnates, losing value to inflation.
| Conservative Co-Executor’s Stance | Growth-Oriented Co-Executor’s Stance |
| “Let’s put all the cash in a federally insured savings account. We can’t risk losing a single penny of the principal. It’s the safest option.” | “Our duty is to make the assets productive. Leaving cash in a savings account is irresponsible. We need a balanced portfolio of stocks and bonds.” |
| Legal Justification: Duty to preserve capital. | Legal Justification: Duty to act as a “prudent investor.” |
| The Consequence of Deadlock: The estate’s funds earn virtually no interest while the co-executors argue. The purchasing power of the inheritance decreases over time, and a potential opportunity for growth is lost, harming the beneficiaries in the long run. |
Scenario 3: The Resentment Over an Unequal Workload
This conflict is less about a specific decision and more about the human dynamics of the role. Often, one co-executor is more organized or geographically closer and naturally takes the lead on the hands-on tasks: hiring the attorney, inventorying assets, and communicating with the court.21
This “doer” sibling can quickly grow to resent the other, feeling they are carrying the entire burden alone. The more passive sibling, in turn, might feel shut out of the process or that the other is being overly controlling.21 What the testator intended as a gesture of fairness becomes a source of deep, personal friction that can poison the sibling relationship long after the estate is closed.
| The “Doer” Sibling’s Actions | The “Passive” Sibling’s Inaction |
| Spends hours inventorying personal property, hires and communicates with the estate attorney, and manages the estate bank account. | Is slow to respond to emails, misses scheduled calls, and fails to review or sign documents in a timely manner. |
| Emotional Result: Feels overwhelmed, unappreciated, and resentful. Believes the other is lazy or shirking responsibility. | Emotional Result: Feels marginalized, untrusted, or that their input is not valued. May become defensive or obstructive in response. |
| The Consequence of Deadlock: The estate administration is delayed due to slow communication and signatures. The “doer” sibling’s resentment builds, leading to angry confrontations and a complete breakdown of the working relationship, making every future decision a battle. |
Mistakes to Avoid: Common Traps for Co-Executors
Navigating a co-executorship is fraught with potential missteps. Being aware of these common traps can help you avoid costly errors, personal liability, and irreparable damage to family relationships.
- Mistake 1: Acting Unilaterally. The most common error is assuming you can handle a “small” task without your co-executor’s approval. Unless the will explicitly allows it, any action taken alone is legally invalid and can be challenged. The consequence is that you may be held personally liable for any negative outcomes of that unauthorized action.
- Mistake 2: Commingling Funds. Never, under any circumstances, mix estate funds with your personal money. You must open a separate bank account in the name of the estate for all transactions.1 Mixing funds is a serious breach of fiduciary duty and can be viewed as self-dealing, which is grounds for immediate removal and financial penalties.
- Mistake 3: Distributing Assets Too Soon. It is tempting to give beneficiaries their inheritance quickly to make them happy. However, you are legally required to pay all of the estate’s debts, taxes, and administrative expenses first.27 If you distribute assets and then discover there isn’t enough money left to pay the final tax bill, you can be held personally responsible for the shortfall.28
- Mistake 4: Keeping Poor Records. You have a duty to account for every penny that flows in and out of the estate. Failing to keep meticulous records of all transactions, decisions, and communications leaves you vulnerable.29 If a beneficiary questions an expense or a decision, clear records are your best defense. Without them, a court may rule against you.
- Mistake 5: Letting Emotions Dictate Decisions. Grief, sibling rivalry, and old family wounds often surface during estate administration.21 Making decisions based on emotion rather than on your legal duty to the will and the beneficiaries is a breach of your role. The consequence is not only poor decision-making but also the high likelihood of escalating conflicts that end up in court.
The Ultimate Solution: How a Will Can Prevent Deadlock Before It Starts
The single most powerful tool for avoiding co-executor conflict is the will itself. A person creating a will (the testator) can override the default rule of unanimity by including specific, carefully drafted clauses that provide a clear path for resolving disagreements.
These “escape hatch” provisions can transform a potentially dysfunctional arrangement into a workable one:
- Tie-Breaker Clause: The will can name a trusted, neutral third party—such as an estate attorney, a CPA, or a family friend—to act as a tie-breaker.31 When the co-executors are deadlocked, they present their arguments to this person, whose decision is final and binding.
- Final Authority Clause: The will can grant one specific co-executor the final say on all decisions or on certain types of decisions (e.g., financial matters).32 This creates a clear hierarchy and an instant deadlock-breaking mechanism.
- Majority Rules Provision: If there are three or more co-executors, the will can state that decisions can be made by a majority vote rather than requiring unanimity.32 This prevents a single dissenting executor from holding up the entire process.
- Authorization to Act “Severally”: A will can include language that explicitly empowers the co-executors to act “severally” (independently) instead of “jointly”.4 This gives each co-executor the power to act alone on behalf of the estate, but it should be used with caution as it eliminates the check-and-balance safeguard.
A Practical Blueprint for Success: Do’s and Don’ts for Co-Executors
| Do’s | Don’ts |
| ✅ Do Communicate Formally. Establish a regular meeting schedule and keep a written log of all decisions, discussions, and action items. This creates a professional record and reduces misunderstandings.24 | ❌ Don’t Make Assumptions. Never assume your co-executor agrees with you or has completed a task. Confirm everything in writing to create a clear paper trail. |
| ✅ Do Hire a Single Estate Attorney. Hire one lawyer to represent you jointly in your capacity as co-executors. This ensures you both receive the same legal advice and helps present a united front.34 | ❌ Don’t Use Separate Lawyers (Initially). Hiring individual lawyers from the start often creates an adversarial relationship. A joint attorney’s role is to guide the estate, not to take sides in a personal dispute. |
| ✅ Do Divide Tasks, Not Authority. You can agree to divide the workload based on skills (e.g., one handles finances, the other handles property), but you must still jointly approve all final decisions.32 | ❌ Don’t Hide Information. You have a duty to be transparent with each other. Concealing financial records, offers on property, or communication from beneficiaries is a breach of your fiduciary duty. |
| ✅ Do Understand Your State’s Laws. As shown above, state laws vary. Know the specific rules in your jurisdiction regarding joint action, real estate, and compensation. | ❌ Don’t Let Personal Feelings Interfere. Your duty is to the testator’s wishes as written in the will, not to your personal opinion or your relationship with a beneficiary. Remain objective. |
| ✅ Do Keep Beneficiaries Informed. Provide regular, joint updates to all beneficiaries on the status of the estate. Transparency can prevent suspicion and reduce the likelihood of challenges.35 | ❌ Don’t Involve Beneficiaries in Your Disputes. It is unprofessional and damaging to try to get beneficiaries to take your side in a disagreement with your co-executor. Resolve your issues privately or through formal channels. |
The Co-Executor Dilemma: A Clear-Eyed Look at the Pros and Cons
Appointing co-executors is a decision with significant trade-offs. While often done with the best intentions, it’s crucial to weigh the potential benefits against the very real risks.
| Pros of Appointing Co-Executors | Cons of Appointing Co-Executors |
| ✅ Shared Workload. Administering an estate is a time-consuming job. Sharing the responsibilities can make the burden more manageable, especially for large or complex estates.13 | ❌ High Potential for Deadlock. The requirement for unanimous agreement is a recipe for conflict. A simple disagreement can bring the entire process to a halt, causing costly delays.5 |
| ✅ Combined Skills and Expertise. Pairing individuals with complementary skills—for example, a family member with personal knowledge and an accountant with financial acumen—can lead to better overall management.5 | ❌ Logistical Nightmares. Coordinating schedules for meetings and getting multiple signatures on every document can be incredibly inefficient, especially if co-executors live in different states.5 |
| ✅ Checks and Balances. Having a second person review all decisions can serve as a safeguard against errors, poor judgment, or even dishonest actions by a single executor.5 | ❌ Joint Liability. You are legally responsible for your co-executor’s mistakes. Their negligence or misconduct can put your personal assets at risk.6 |
| ✅ Avoids Appearance of Favoritism. Naming multiple children as co-executors is often done to avoid hurting feelings and to show equal trust, with the hope of preserving family harmony.21 | ❌ Can Amplify Family Conflict. Instead of preventing conflict, a co-executorship often becomes the arena where old sibling rivalries and resentments play out, causing irreparable damage to relationships.21 |
| ✅ Continuity. If one co-executor becomes ill, incapacitated, or passes away, the other can continue managing the estate without interruption, provided the will allows it.7 | ❌ Increased Costs. Disagreements often lead to each co-executor hiring their own attorney, with all legal fees being paid from the estate. This depletes the assets intended for the beneficiaries.7 |
When Deadlock is Unavoidable: Your Path to Resolution
Even with the best intentions, co-executors can find themselves at an impasse. When communication breaks down, the law provides a tiered system of remedies, from collaborative negotiation to court intervention.
Step 1: Professional Mediation
Before heading to court, mediation is almost always the best next step. A neutral, third-party mediator, typically an attorney experienced in probate law, facilitates a structured conversation to help you find common ground.38 Mediation is confidential, far less expensive than litigation, and offers the best chance of preserving family relationships.24 The goal is to reach a mutually acceptable agreement that can be written down and become legally binding.
Step 2: Petitioning the Court for Instructions
If mediation fails or a co-executor refuses to participate, any co-executor can file a “petition for instructions” with the probate court.24 This is not a lawsuit to remove the other person, but rather a formal request for a judge to resolve a specific, deadlocked issue. Both sides will present their arguments, and the judge will issue a binding court order directing you on how to proceed.31 While effective, this process is public, costly, and adversarial.
Step 3: The Last Resort—Petitioning for Removal
In extreme cases where a co-executor’s behavior is actively harming the estate, the ultimate recourse is to ask the court to remove them from their role. This is a drastic measure that courts do not take lightly, and you must have strong legal grounds to succeed.39
Valid grounds for removal are not about simple disagreements or personality clashes. They involve serious misconduct, such as 39:
- A clear breach of fiduciary duty, like using estate funds for personal expenses (self-dealing).
- Gross mismanagement that has caused significant financial loss to the estate.
- An obvious conflict of interest that makes it impossible for them to act impartially.
- Refusal to comply with a court order.
- Becoming legally incapacitated and unable to perform their duties.
The process involves filing a formal petition and proving your case with evidence in a court hearing. If you are successful, the court can remove the co-executor and either allow the remaining one to act alone or appoint a new, independent administrator to take their place.39
The Professional Alternative: When to Hire a Corporate Fiduciary
For large, complex estates or for families with a history of conflict, the best solution is often to appoint a neutral, professional third party. A corporate fiduciary—such as a bank’s trust department or a private trust company—can serve as executor or co-executor.41
The advantages are significant:
- Objectivity: A corporate fiduciary has no emotional stake in family dynamics and is bound to follow the will impartially, which can prevent disputes before they start.41
- Expertise: They have teams of legal, tax, and investment professionals who handle estate administration every day. This reduces the risk of costly errors.22
- Continuity: Unlike an individual, a corporation cannot die or become incapacitated. This ensures the administration process is never interrupted.41
- Accountability: Corporate fiduciaries are highly regulated, audited, and insured, providing an extra layer of protection for the estate’s assets.41
A popular hybrid approach is to name a family member as a co-executor alongside a corporate fiduciary. This combines the professional’s technical expertise with the family member’s personal insight, creating a balanced and effective team.44
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
Can one co-executor act without the other?
No. The default rule in most states requires co-executors to act jointly and unanimously on all significant decisions. Acting alone is legally invalid unless the will or a court order specifically allows it.5
Are co-executors liable for each other’s mistakes?
Yes. Co-executors generally have joint liability, meaning you can be held personally responsible for the financial harm caused by your co-executor’s errors or misconduct. This creates a duty to monitor each other’s actions.6
Can a will allow co-executors to act independently?
Yes. A person can include a provision in their will that explicitly authorizes co-executors to act independently (“severally”) or by a majority vote. If the will is silent, the default rule of unanimity applies.4
How do we sell a house if my co-executor sibling won’t agree?
You cannot sell the property without their signature. If you are at a deadlock, your options are to try professional mediation to reach an agreement or petition the probate court for an order compelling the sale.1
How can a co-executor be removed from their role?
Yes, but only by a court order. You must file a petition with the probate court and prove there are legal grounds for removal, such as self-dealing, mismanagement of assets, or a clear conflict of interest.39
How are co-executors paid for their work?
Yes, they are entitled to compensation from the estate. State laws vary; some require co-executors to split a single fee, while others, like New York, may allow each to receive a full fee if the estate is large enough.45
Should I name my children as co-executors to be fair?
No, most estate planning experts advise against this. While well-intentioned, it often creates conflict and damages sibling relationships. A better practice is to name one as executor and the others as alternates.21