Estate of Wallace Ex Rel. Wallace v. Mohamed
2011 Miss. LEXIS 97
Miss.2011Background
- Cynthia Gilkey Wallace died, leaving two children and a husband who claimed to be the administrator of her estate.
- Louis Wallace opened the estate, was appointed administrator, and sued Dr. Emad Mohamed in a wrongful-death action.
- Mohamed moved to intervene to challenge Wallace’s status as administrator, asserting Wallace was not Gilkey’s legally married husband.
- Evidence included a marriage license to Magee, Wallace-Gilkey marriage certificate, a divorce complaint, a 1991 divorce-dismissal order, and testimony suggesting Gilkey’s continued marriage to Magee.
- The chancellor granted Mohamed’s intervention and removed Wallace as administrator, appointing the chancery clerk as administrator.
- Court of Appeals reversed, holding Mohamed had no standing and that removal of Wallace was not justified; Mississippi Supreme Court reversed on the removal issue and deemed the intervention moot.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Mohamed had standing to intervene | Mohamed, as a plaintiff in the suit against him, has an interest in the estate’s administration. | Mohamed lacked independent standing under Rule 24 to intervene as the estate’s defendant sought relief against him. | Issue moot; court upheld removal ruling and did not decide standing. |
| Whether the chancellor abused discretion in removing Wallace as administrator | Wallace was the properly serving administrator; removal was unwarranted without clear grounds. | Wallace was not statutorily entitled to appointment if not legally married; replacement with a neutral administrator was appropriate. | Chancellor did not abuse discretion; Wallace not statutorily entitled to appointment, and replacement was permissible. |
Key Cases Cited
- Moore v. Roecker, 239 Miss. 606, 124 So.2d 473 (Miss. 1960) (trial court discretion in administrator appointment)
- In re Estate of Moreland, 537 So.2d 1337 (Miss. 1989) (wide discretion in appointment and revocation of executors)
- Stribling v. Washington, 204 Miss. 529, 37 So.2d 759 (Miss. 1948) (foundational standard for chancery discretion)
- Denson v. George, 642 So.2d 909 (Miss. 1994) (review of factual findings for manifest error)
- Erwin v. Hodge (In re Erwin's Estate), 317 So.2d 55 (Miss. 1975) (presumptions in marriage-related estate matters)