Jump to content
breeman

Claims against an estate

Recommended Posts

 

I also have never practiced in OH, but the statute seems pretty clear:  "Except as provided in section 2117.061 of the Revised Code, all claims shall be presented within six months after the death of the decedent, whether or not the estate is released from administration or an executor or administrator is appointed during that six-month period."  ORC 2117.06( B) (emphasis added).

 

Frankly, it's a bit of a bizarre statute since it requires presentment of a claim "whether or not . . . an executor or administrator is appointed during [the] six-month period," but the prescribed methods of presenting a claim (in sub-section (A)(1)) all require that a claim either be presented to the exec/admin or be "actually received by the executor or administrator within the" six-month period.  It makes no sense that a claim must be presented within six months after date of death, regardless of whether there is an exec/admin, but require that the claim either be presented to the exec/admin or be received by the exec/admin during that time period.

 

The illogic behind this statute tells me that there's either more to it than I've read or that there is case authority that interprets the statute in a way that avoids the silly game of "hey...let's wait six months before opening probate so that we can screw over all the creditor!  <snicker, snicker>"

 

The OP:  I hope this discussion gives you a sufficient frame of reference that you can have an intelligent discussion with your attorney about this.

  

My reaction too.  But, reading around, it seems that it has been interpreted as written.  

 

You're a creditor?  No probate opened?  Then, open it yourself within 6 months of death.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was under the assumption that this site was here for help. If you only want to make nasty comments and I suggest you move on to someone else's post

 

Exactly what type of help are you looking for?  You can't or won't tell us anything about the claim or why the court ruled as it did.

 

Besides, you've been given about the only advice that can be given.  If your wife actually has standing, she can appeal the decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was under the assumption that this site was here for help. If you only want to make nasty comments and I suggest you move on to someone else's post

 

I assume you're not directing this at everyone who has responded in this thread, but it's worth noting that your original post contained no substantive content and that getting relevant info from you has involved more than a little tooth pulling.

 

In terms of helping you understand the court's ruling, I'm not sure what more anyone can say.  You haven't said whether the court issued a written ruling or, if so, what it says (i.e., how the court explained its ruling that is apparently contrary to the statute).  You also haven't said whether or, if so, how your lawyer explained this.  Nor have you provided any information about the creditor or the amount of the claim or the extent to which your wife will receive less $$ at the end of the day because of the allowance of the claim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
,,, or the extent to which your wife will receive less $$ at the end of the day because of the allowance of the claim.

 

 

But, remember...   The female half of "we" is not related to the deceased and there is no will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But, remember...   The female half of "we" is not related to the deceased and there is no will.

 

Through the slow trickle of factual info, I missed that there is no will.  That being the case, isn't this basically an academic debate?  If the OP's wife is the administrator of the estate, then all she should care about in terms of claims is that the court makes a ruling one way or the other so that she is not holding the bag with respect to a potential incorrect decision.  Since she's not getting anything other than an administrator's fee, she has no standing to complain about an erroneously allowed claim (except to the extent the admin automatically has standing, but she certainly has no "real" interest).  Whether she distributes to the former stepfather's brother $20,000 or $19,000 shouldn't matter to her in the slightest.  She'll still get her half of the net sales proceeds without taking the claim into account; the claim will come out of the other half that is owned by the estate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether she distributes to the former stepfather's brother $20,000 or $19,000 shouldn't matter to her in the slightest.  She'll still get her half of the net sales proceeds without taking the claim into account; the claim will come out of the other half that is owned by the estate.

 

Yeah, but look back to find out who is living in the house now.  And who expects the deceased's brother to gift the other 1/2 to him/her.  Any guesses?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We want the house and are prepared to offer a settlement to purchase the other half if necessary. But the debtor should still be held to the state law

 

Then figure out who has standing to appeal (you refuse to say who is who in the probate case) and do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our objection was filed in my father in laws brother name. As his only living relative.

 

Again, who is the court appointed administrator of the estate?

 

And did the judge give any reason for allowing the claim?

 

"Our" objection?  Filed in the brother's name?  

 

What the hell is going on here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2117.04 Appeal from final order or judgment.

Upon the hearing as to the allowance of an executor's or administrator's claim against the estate the executor or administrator represents, an appeal may be taken from a final order or judgment of the probate court upon a matter of law by any person affected by the order or judgment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2117.04 Appeal from final order or judgment.

Upon the hearing as to the allowance of an executor's or administrator's claim against the estate the executor or administrator represents, an appeal may be taken from a final order or judgment of the probate court upon a matter of law by any person affected by the order or judgment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2117.06 Presentation and allowance of creditor's claims - pending action against decedent.

(A) All creditors having claims against an estate, including claims arising out of contract, out of tort, on cognovit notes, or on judgments, whether due or not due, secured or unsecured, liquidated or unliquidated, shall present their claims in one of the following manners:

(1) After the appointment of an executor or administrator and prior to the filing of a final account or a certificate of termination, in one of the following manners:

(a) To the executor or administrator in a writing;

(B) To the executor or administrator in a writing, and to the probate court by filing a copy of the writing with it;

© In a writing that is sent by ordinary mail addressed to the decedent and that is actually received by the executor or administrator within the appropriate time specified in division (B) of this section. For purposes of this division, if an executor or administrator is not a natural person, the writing shall be considered as being actually received by the executor or administrator only if the person charged with the primary responsibility of administering the estate of the decedent actually receives the writing within the appropriate time specified in division (B) of this section.

(2) If the final account or certificate of termination has been filed, in a writing to those distributees of the decedent's estate who may share liability for the payment of the claim.

(B) Except as provided in section 2117.061 of the Revised Code, all claims shall be presented within six months after the death of the decedent, whether or not the estate is released from administration or an executor or administrator is appointed during that six-month period. Every claim presented shall set forth the claimant's address.

© Except as provided in section 2117.061 of the Revised Code, a claim that is not presented within six months after the death of the decedent shall be forever barred as to all parties, including, but not limited to, devisees, legatees, and distributees. No payment shall be made on the claim and no action shall be maintained on the claim, except as otherwise provided in sections 2117.37 to 2117.42 of the Revised Code with reference to contingent claims.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In all of this I don't see who filed the belated claim. Was this a

back tax claim or over-payment of Medicaid claim or any other 

claim by a governmental unit? Some states do have an exception

in their laws for governmental units.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please stop with all the seriatim posts.  Collect all your thoughts and include them in a single post.

 

Let's say that the property's fair market value is $100,000 and that it is owned free and clear of any encumbrances.  Let's say that the sale nets $95,000 after commissions and costs.  Your wife will get $47,500, and the estate will get $47,500.  If we assume the estate has no other assets and that the nursing home claim is the only claim and is for $7,500, then the net value of the estate will be $40,000, and that amount will be paid to your wife's former stepfather's brother.  Nothing about this claim will affect what your wife receives when the property is sold.  If you and your wife want to buy the property, you're free to offer the estate 1/2 of the property's fair market value.

 

Again, nothing about the nursing home claim will affect your wife's interest in the property, so, other than a generalized concern that judges should make legally correct rulings, I can't understand why you care about this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've no idea why you'd posted items 41-43.  I'm concluding that there's some kind of weird neurological deficit that is affecting your ability to communicate effectively. 

 

Hiring a lawyer to address your wife's concerns about her half-interest (presumed) in the house doesn't mean that you have a marital ownership interest in the place.  In any legal sense, there is no "we" inasmuch as you have no ownership stake in your wife's inherited interest in the house.  Should your wife feel like issuing a quit claim in full or in part of her ownership interest in the house, however, she's free to so do. 

 

I'll note that you didn't bother to mention at any earlier relevant point that you and your wife were living in the house. [...]  Are you paying an existing mortgage on the house in the FIL's name?  I'll presume not, because you seem fixated on a "debtor" (v. creditor) whom I am concluding is your wife's brother , given the reference in item #45 to "nursing home for his mother" being the apparent answer to someone asking you to finally come out and identify the creditor's claim.

 

The attorney you consulted is not competent.  I presume based on piece meal dissemination of information that your mother-in-law's estate may never in fact have administered.  This conclusion is based on the reference to the creditor making a claim relating to nursing home care for a MOTHER (your wife's?) v. the stepfather.  There is still quite a lot of relevant information you've not bothered to relay and, I agree with harrylime, your refusal or inability to communicate property has ensured you've worn out the welcome.

 

I've no idea how your wife would be in a position to object on behalf of the stepfather's brother if the court is only hearing matters related to the stepfather's estate (v. her mother's as well).  I also don't know if this court has properly taken up the matter of what is in effect a partition suit if it has ordered the house to be sold v. asked the parties to address the matter of your wife buying out the estate's interest in the house.  You of course don't bother to mention that your wife has offered to buy out the estate, only that she's willing to make the offer.

 

The administrator not being interested in getting the best possible price for the house, unless it's escaped your notice, only serves to your wife's benefit insofar as it relates to her offer to the estate to buy out its half interest.

 

As for references to "degradation" and "foul language" and "nasty", your definitions are clearly non-standard (if you believe otherwise, you might want to point out the examples of same). 

 

If you feel like clearing up any of the informational mess that you've created by your communication and lack thereof, feel free.

 

As for a deal with the brother, it seems your wife should be more concerned about making a deal with the administrator of the estate.  Yikes.

Edited by Findlaw_FN
• [A portion of this post has been removed in accordance with the posting guidelines outlined in the Community Guidelines . Please remember to respect the opinions of other members. This community relies on honest discussion, but only as long it sta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We already have a deal worked out with the brother. That's when we care. We want the house

 

What happened to that attorney that you mentioned that you and your wife retained?

 

Or is that something that you made up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...