In re Estate of Crain
2017 Ohio 2724
Ohio Ct. App.2017Background
- Decedent Ralph Crain died June 9, 2014; David A. Shepherd was appointed Special Administrator WWA and filed an amended inventory in October 2014.
- Several adult children (exceptors) alleged that Ralph kept six strongboxes of cash containing $130,000 each (≈ $780,000 total) and that the amended inventory omitted those funds.
- Three exceptors testified they personally saw $130,000 in one or more strongboxes in 2010–2011 and were told all six boxes contained the same amount; other family members (Frederick and Bryan) delivered four strongboxes to the administrator after Ralph’s death.
- The four strongboxes turned over by Frederick contained documents and $20,379.80 in cash; the Special Administrator inspected the home, had contents appraised, identified bank accounts, and counted the cash in the received boxes inviting family representatives to observe.
- Exceptors filed exceptions to the amended inventory; after evidentiary hearings the probate court dismissed the exceptions for failure to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the alleged cash existed at decedent’s death. Appellants appealed and the appellate court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Special Administrator should have investigated alleged missing cash | Exceptors: Shepherd failed fiduciary duties by not sufficiently investigating or locating the alleged six boxes of $130,000 each | Shepherd: He inspected the home, obtained appraisals, identified accounts, counted cash in the boxes turned over, and invited parties to observe; no evidence the cash existed at death | Court: Exceptors failed to prove missing assets; administrator’s actions were adequate under the circumstances |
| Whether exceptors met burden to show assets existed at death and belonged on inventory | Exceptors: Testimony that boxes existed and contained cash establishes assets that should be on inventory | Defendant: Witnesses saw cash years before death; no evidence the six boxes with $130,000 each existed at time of death | Court: Burden is clear and convincing evidence; absent proof assets existed at death, they need not be included; exceptors failed to meet burden |
| Whether probate court abused discretion in overruling exceptions | Exceptors: Court erred by accepting the amended inventory despite alleged omissions | Defendant: Probate court held evidentiary hearing and made factual findings supported by competent, credible evidence | Court: No abuse of discretion; factual findings are supported and legal standard properly applied |
| Whether alternative remedies were available for alleged concealment | Exceptors: Implied undue influence and concealment required more inquiry | Defendant: If concealment suspected, exceptors could have filed a concealment action or sought removal/specific investigation; they did not | Court: Failure to pursue available remedies and lack of specific proof undermines exceptors’ claim |
Key Cases Cited
- Ferranto v. State, 112 Ohio St. 667 (establishing abuse-of-discretion framework) (court describes abuse of discretion standard)
- Cross v. Ledford, 161 Ohio St. 469 (defining clear and convincing evidence standard)
- In re Estate of Platt, 148 Ohio App.3d 132 (summary nature of exceptions to inventory proceedings)
- Kemp v. In re Estate of Kemp, 189 Ohio App.3d 232 (executor’s duty to seek and collect all decedent assets)
- Kelsey v. In re Estate of Kelsey, 165 Ohio App.3d 680 (items outside estate’s possession may still be included in inventory)
- Whitaker v. Estate of Whitaker, 105 Ohio App.3d 46 (appellate deference where competent, credible evidence supports trial court findings)