In re Estate of Bringman
2017 Ohio 7083
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Decedent Barbara J. Bringman died circa March 23, 2016; attorney Steven McGann filed for administration in Knox County probate court on Sept. 13, 2016, stating decedent had been temporarily living in Reynoldsburg but had been a Knox County resident earlier.
- A Knox County hearing was scheduled for Oct. 26, 2016; about an hour before that hearing, William Paul Bringman (the decedent’s ex‑husband) filed an objection asserting Knox County lacked jurisdiction and attaching a Franklin County probate entry appointing him executor.
- Knox County continued the matter, held a further hearing (Dec. 1, 2016), and on Jan. 23, 2017 entered that administration would proceed in Knox County and requested certified copies from Franklin County; it treated the Franklin documents as foreign.
- Franklin County had previously appointed Bringman executor but documentation in the Knox record indicates Franklin vacated that appointment on Nov. 4, 2016.
- Bringman appealed the Knox County entry, arguing Knox lacked jurisdiction; the probate court entry was characterized as denying a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and leaving administration issues for further hearing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Bringman) | Defendant's Argument (Knox/estate) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Knox County probate court has jurisdiction to administer the estate | Franklin County appointment controls; Knox County lacks jurisdiction | Knox County is a proper forum; its entry rejecting Bringman’s forum argument stands | Court affirmed Knox County jurisdiction (appeal overruled) |
| Whether the probate entry is a final, appealable order | Appealed the January 23 entry as erroneous | Knox argued the entry was interlocutory (set further proceedings) | Court noted the entry was essentially a denial of dismissal and not clearly final; appellant did not address final‑appealability |
| Whether Bringman has standing/interest as executor after divorce | Claims appointment/interest as executor under Franklin appointment | R.C. 2107.33 revokes testamentary nomination of ex‑spouse after divorce; Franklin appointment was vacated per record | Court found Bringman’s executor interest dubious (divorce revoked nomination); no demonstrated prejudice |
| Whether any error prejudiced Bringman in his representative capacity | Argued jurisdictional error harmed his executor rights | Court: an executor must show prejudice to reverse; Bringman did not demonstrate prejudice | Court held no prejudicial error shown; appeal fails |
Key Cases Cited
- Holm v. Smilowitz, 83 Ohio App.3d 757 (Ohio Ct. App.) (denial of motion to dismiss for lack of subject‑matter jurisdiction in custody context is not a final, appealable order)
- Fried v. Fried, 65 Ohio App.3d 61 (Ohio Ct. App.) (an executor cannot appeal a judgment that does not prejudice him in his representative capacity)
- Boulger v. Evans, 54 Ohio St.2d 371 (Ohio 1978) (standing/prejudice principles for representative capacity appeals)