Ex parte Jamie Kay Shields Barrows

892 So. 2d 914 (Ala. 2004) · Supreme Court of Alabama · May 7, 2004 · No. 1030359

Summary

The Supreme Court of Alabama denied Jamie Kay Shields Barrows's petition for a writ of mandamus seeking dismissal of a will contest for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The court held that although the probate court lacked jurisdiction to transfer the contest because the will had already been admitted to probate, the contestant's subsequent filing of a copy of the complaint in circuit court, with the appropriate case designation and cover sheet, properly invoked circuit-court jurisdiction within the statutory six-month period. The court concluded that Barrows had not established a clear legal right to dismissal.

Holdings

  1. The probate court lacked jurisdiction over the will contest because Alabama Code section 43-8-190 permits a pre-probate contest to be filed in the probate court, but Shields, Jr. filed his contest after the will had been admitted to probate. The probate court's purported transfer order was therefore a nullity.
  2. The circuit court acquired jurisdiction because the filing of the copied complaint, with the court designation changed from probate to circuit, together with a circuit-court cover sheet, constituted an independent and adequate filing of the will contest.
  3. The docket fee was timely filed because the six-month filing period ended on Sunday, August 10, 2003, and the fee filed on Monday, August 11, was timely under Alabama Code section 1-1-4.
  4. Barrows was not entitled to mandamus relief because she failed to establish a clear legal right to dismissal; the circuit court had subject-matter jurisdiction over the will contest.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the probate court had jurisdiction to transfer a will contest filed after the will had been admitted to probate.
  2. Whether the circuit court acquired subject-matter jurisdiction when the contestant filed in that court a copy of the probate-court complaint with the court designation changed, a circuit-court cover sheet, and the docket fee.
  3. Whether Barrows established a clear legal right to mandamus relief requiring dismissal of the will contest.

Disposition

writ_denied

Cases Cited (17)

  • Ex parte Johnson, 715 So. 2d 783, 785 (Ala. 1998)(followed)
  • Ex parte Alfa Mutual General Insurance Co., 684 So. 2d 1281 (Ala. 1996)(followed)
  • Forrester v. Putman, 409 So. 2d 773 (Ala. 1981)(followed)
  • Norton v. Liddell, 280 Ala. 353, 194 So. 2d 514 (1967)(followed)
  • Ex parte Jefferson County, 767 So. 2d 343 (Ala. 2000)(conflicting authority noted)
  • Ex parte Spears, 621 So. 2d 1255 (Ala. 1993)(followed)
  • Ex parte Mercury Financial Corp., 715 So. 2d 196, 198 (Ala. 1997)(followed)
  • Ex parte Rudolph, 515 So. 2d 704, 706 (Ala. 1987)(followed)
  • Ex parte Flint Construction Co., 775 So. 2d 805, 808 (Ala. 2000)(followed)
  • Ex parte Pearson, 241 Ala. 467, 3 So. 2d 5 (1941)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 17.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…