Whether one executor can act without the other depends on two things: what the will says and what the state’s probate law says when the will is silent. In most cases, a single co-executor cannot make significant decisions alone. Routine, low-stakes tasks are usually fine. Major moves — selling property, distributing assets, settling claims — almost always require every co-executor to sign on, and acting alone when you shouldn’t can create personal liability and undo the transaction.
What the Will Says Comes First
The will’s wording is the starting point, and two phrases do most of the work.
When a will directs co-executors to act “jointly,” every meaningful decision needs agreement from all of them. No single co-executor can sell property, distribute assets, or settle a claim without the others signing off. That structure protects beneficiaries from one-sided decisions, but it can stall the administration when co-executors disagree or one is hard to reach.
When a will authorizes co-executors to act “jointly and severally,” each one has full authority to act alone. Either can sign checks, approve transactions, or make legal decisions for the estate without consulting the other. It moves faster, but one co-executor can bind the estate to a deal the other would have refused. Wills sometimes take this route when co-executors live far apart, or when one runs the day-to-day finances and the other functions more as a check on big decisions.
When the Will Doesn’t Address It
Plenty of wills name co-executors without saying whether they must act together. In that case, state law fills the gap, and the default in most states is that all co-executors must agree before taking any action tied to administering or distributing the estate.
About 18 states have adopted some version of the Uniform Probate Code, which sets that unanimous-action default but carves out three narrow exceptions. Any co-executor can receive property or payments owed to the estate on their own. Any co-executor can act alone in a genuine emergency to preserve estate assets. And one co-executor can act on behalf of the others through a specific delegation of authority.
A smaller group of states lets a majority act when there are three or more co-executors. If a will names three and two agree, they can proceed over the third’s objection. The dissenting co-executor should put the objection in writing to create a record and shield themselves from personal liability for the majority’s decision.
Because these defaults vary so much, a co-executor who finds the will silent on the point should check the state’s probate code before assuming anything.
Routine Tasks a Single Co-Executor Can Usually Handle
Even under a strict unanimity rule, most jurisdictions treat minor administrative tasks differently from significant estate decisions. A single co-executor can typically take care of routine upkeep without formal sign-off from the others. Paying a monthly utility bill on an estate property, collecting mail, depositing a refund check into the estate account, or scheduling basic maintenance on a house all fit in this category. These are the things that simply have to happen so the estate doesn’t lose value while the larger administration works itself out.
Decisions That Require All Co-Executors
Major decisions are a different matter. Selling real property, liquidating investment accounts, settling litigation on behalf of the estate, and making lump-sum distributions to beneficiaries almost always require all co-executors to participate.
Real estate is the clearest example. Title companies and buyers generally expect every co-executor to sign the deed and related transfer documents. A deed signed by only one co-executor when the law requires both creates a title defect that can delay or derail the sale entirely.
The middle ground is harder. Hiring an attorney for the estate, choosing an appraiser, or deciding whether to keep a family business running during probate are judgment calls without a universal rule. When it’s not obvious, the safer path is to get all co-executors on board before committing to anything that can’t easily be undone.
Banks and the IRS Force Joint Action in Practice
Even where the law might allow one co-executor to act alone on a given task, institutions often won’t cooperate. Most financial institutions require every co-executor listed on the letters testamentary to be a signatory on the estate account, and many banks insist that all co-executors sign checks and authorize withdrawals. The bank’s concern is simple: if it releases funds on one signature and the other co-executor later says the withdrawal was unauthorized, the bank is exposed. Some banks will allow single-signature authority if the co-executors sign an agreement to that effect when the account opens, but that isn’t the default.
Federal estate tax filings work similarly. The IRS expects all co-executors to join in filing a single, complete Form 706. If they can’t cooperate enough to file jointly, each co-executor must file a separate return disclosing everything they know about the estate’s assets, beneficiaries, and property interests.1Internal Revenue Service. Instructions for Form 706 (Rev. September 2025) Filing separately creates duplication, potential inconsistencies, and a much higher chance of IRS scrutiny. It’s one of the strongest practical reasons for co-executors to find a way to work together even when they disagree elsewhere.
When You’re Legitimately Alone
Sometimes a co-executor ends up acting alone not by choice but because the other can no longer serve. Estates can take months or years, and during that time a co-executor might die, become incapacitated, or resign.
In most states, the surviving or remaining co-executor can continue administering the estate alone with all the powers the co-executors previously shared. The Uniform Probate Code makes this explicit: unless the will says otherwise, every power exercisable by co-representatives passes to whoever remains after one co-executor’s appointment ends. The personal representative of the deceased co-executor’s own estate has no authority over the original estate that was being administered.
Resignation takes a formal step. A co-executor who wants to step down typically must file a written resignation with the probate court and may need to account for any estate assets they handled. If the will names an alternate executor, that person can step in. If no alternate is named, the remaining co-executor usually continues alone, though the court can appoint a replacement if it decides the estate needs more than one person managing it.
One practical note: even after the court accepts a resignation, banks and title companies may require updated letters testamentary reflecting the change before they’ll process transactions with the remaining executor alone. Build in time for that paperwork.
The Liability Risk of Acting Alone — or Letting Someone Else
Serving as a co-executor isn’t a passive role. Each co-executor owes a fiduciary duty to the estate and its beneficiaries, and that duty includes keeping an eye on what the other co-executor is doing.
Two liability paths matter here. The first is direct: a co-executor who acts alone without authority, or who mishandles estate funds, is personally on the hook. The second is less obvious. If you knew or should have known your co-executor was breaching their duty and you did nothing, a court can hold you responsible for the resulting losses. The “I wasn’t involved” defense fails when courts expect co-executors to take reasonable steps to prevent harm rather than look the other way.
Delegation between co-executors is possible but has limits. Splitting practical tasks — one handles the financial accounts, the other manages the real property — is common and generally acceptable as long as each stays informed about the overall administration. A blanket handoff, where one co-executor turns everything over and checks out, is treated as an abdication of fiduciary duty. Rubber-stamping decisions without review, or delegating broadly and then losing track, leaves the delegating co-executor sharing liability for whatever goes wrong.
A co-executor who disagrees with a specific decision should document the disagreement in writing. In majority-rule states, a written dissent can operate as a formal shield against liability for the action the majority approved. Even in states without an explicit dissent statute, a paper trail showing you objected and tried to prevent the outcome puts you in a stronger position if beneficiaries later bring a surcharge action.
When Co-Executors Can’t Agree
Disagreement between co-executors is one of the most common reasons estates drag on. Property taxes and insurance keep accruing, investment values shift, and beneficiaries grow frustrated waiting for distributions.
Direct conversation resolves more of these disputes than people expect. Most co-executor conflicts come from different readings of what the decedent wanted, different risk tolerances about selling assets, or different communication styles. Document the outcome in writing even when the conversation feels informal. When talking fails, mediation is worth trying before litigation. Many probate courts will suggest or require it before entertaining a petition for intervention.
If the deadlock is genuinely paralyzing the estate, any co-executor or beneficiary can petition the probate court. The court can issue specific instructions on how to handle a particular asset or decision, order an accounting, and in serious cases remove a co-executor for breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, failure to perform basic duties, conflicts of interest, or incapacity. Personality clashes alone rarely justify removal, but a pattern of obstruction, refusal to communicate, or unilateral action in violation of the will’s terms often does.