Clark v. Kerby

Summary

California's former nonclaim statute (Prob. Code former §§ 9050, 9100) violated due process under *Tulsa Professional Collection Services v. Pope* (1988) 485 U.S. 478, because it permitted barring claims of known or reasonably ascertainable creditors who received only publication notice rather than actual notice of administration. The court held that a creditor's or its attorney's knowledge of the decedent's death does not constitute constructive knowledge of administration, as the duty to file a claim is triggered only by commencement of administration and proper notice. The case was remanded to determine whether the creditor was known or reasonably ascertainable, and if so, the claim could not be time-barred.

Holdings

1. The former nonclaim statute's notice provisions do not comport with due process as to known or reasonably ascertainable creditors because they do not require actual notice to such creditors.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the notice requirements under California's former nonclaim statute (former Probate Code §§ 9050, 9100) comport with the due process standards announced in Tulsa Professional Collection Services v. Pope, 485 U.S. 478 (1988), as to known or reasonably ascertainable creditors.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded