In re Estate of Tullos

Summary

The Fifth District Court of Appeals held that the appointment of an estate administrator was premature because the surviving spouse and next of kin were not provided the notice required by Ohio Revised Code sections 2113.06 and 2113.07. The court reversed the probate court's judgment and remanded for notice and a determination regarding priority to administer the estate. It also held that the filing of the application was not void and did not deprive the probate court of jurisdiction.

Holdings

1. Under R.C. 2113.07, before appointing an executor or administrator, the probate court must obtain a waiver from persons having priority to administer or serve those persons with notice for the purpose of determining whether they wish to accept or renounce administration.
2. Because the surviving spouse and next of kin were not given the notice required by statute, the appointment of the administrator had to be reversed and the matter remanded for notice and a determination under R.C. 2113.06 and 2113.07.
3. The filing of the application for authority to administer the estate was not void and did not deprive the probate court of jurisdiction; the defect was the premature appointment without statutory notice.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the probate court erred by appointing an administrator without giving the surviving spouse and next of kin the notice required by Ohio Revised Code 2113.07 or obtaining a waiver of notice.
2. Whether the failure to provide statutory notice made the appointment premature and required reversal and remand.
3. Whether the filing of the application for authority to administer the estate was void or deprived the probate court of jurisdiction.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded