Glover v. Cornish, 367 P.3d 486

Decedent executed TODDs and a Last Will on the same day, Aug 24, 2011, as part of one estate plan;
Decedent died Aug 29, 2011, five days after TODDs and will execution;
TODDs conveyed two parcels to Cornish and Lewis, who became grantees, with estate debts secured by mortgages;
Decedent had a 2006 promissory note for $140,224.85 secured by a mortgage on Lewis’s TODD parcel and a 2007/2010 mortgage package for Cornish’s parcel;
Personal Representative rejected creditor claims by Grantees and Farm Credit Services (FCS);
Trial court ruled these debts were liabilities of the estate; Court of Civil Appeals reversed on standing and timing grounds;

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the estate must pay debts secured by mortgages on TODD properties	Cornish/Lewis contended no liability for debts beyond the real property transferred	Estate should pay debts as directed by will and NTPA interactions permit estate liability	Yes; debts secured by mortgages are liabilities of the estate
Whether grantees had standing to assert creditor claims	Grantees lacked standing to enforce payment against estate	Grantees had a concrete stake due to property encumbrances and potential foreclosure	Grantees have standing to assert claims
Whether will provisions override NTPA and TODD effects	Will directs payment of debts, including mortgage debts	NTPA TODDs operate independently and do not override will without express language	Will provisions control to require estate payment of mortgage debts despite TODDs
Whether foreclosure timing affects presentation of claims	Foreclosure before presenting a claim is permissible; deficiency judgments follow accordingly	Claimant must present under probate code; foreclosure timing is central	Claims may be presented without a prior foreclosure in this context
Whether trial court lacked jurisdiction because TODDs are non-testamentary instruments	NTPA TODDs should be separate from probate; no overlapping jurisdiction	All instruments executed as one plan fall under probate to discern decedent’s intent	Trial court had probate jurisdiction; TODDs interpreted with will to determine intent

First Mustang State Bank v. Bloodworth, Inc., 825 P.2d 254 (Okla. 1991) (mortgage creates a lien, not conveyance of realty; general rule for mortgages)
Coursey v. Fairchild, 436 P.2d 35 (Okla. 1967) (mortgage debt generally not personal liability of grantor after transfer)
Cahill v. Kilgore, 350 P.2d 928 (Okla. 1960) (foreclosure can proceed without claim; deficiency rules clarified)
In re Estate of Sneed, 953 P.2d 1111 (Okla. 1998) (probate aims to effectuate decedent’s intent)
In re Estate of Holcomb, 63 P.3d 9 (Okla. 2002) (probate guidance on interpretation of wills and debts)
Anderson v. Merriott, 550 P.2d 1320 (Okla. 1976) (unmatured debt treated with protections of §339)
Pauly v. Pauly, 198 Okla. 156, 176 P.2d 491 (Okla. 1946) (treatises and transaction unity affect interpretation)