In re Estate of Fields
2016 Ohio 5358
Ohio Ct. App.2016Background
- Jacquie R. Fields died testate on January 26, 2012; her will (admitted Sept. 5, 2012) named her sons Robert and Rodney Geren as co-executors and left all real and personal property to them.
- The sons accused each other of removing estate property; after a February 27, 2013 hearing the probate court removed both as executors, froze estate property, and ordered an independent administrator be appointed; no third party applied and the court closed the estate on April 22, 2013.
- Rodney (appellant) repeatedly requested the probate court to reopen the estate and intervene to enforce a land contract claim against Robert and to stop a tax-foreclosure action pending in the General Division; he also alleged judicial bias.
- A tax-foreclosure action (filed Jan. 26, 2015) proceeded in the General Division; default judgment was entered for the county July 10, 2015 and the property sold Jan. 13, 2016.
- The probate court declined to reopen the estate on Feb. 10, 2015, stating it lacked a suitable person to administer the will and that the General Division had jurisdiction over the real estate foreclosure.
- Rodney appealed; the Sixth District affirmed the court’s jurisdictional statement and bias ruling but reversed the denial to reopen insofar as the probate court failed to appoint a suitable administrator and remanded with instructions to do so.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether probate court should have reopened the estate and appointed an administrator | Rodney argued the court’s failure to appoint an administrator harmed the estate, prevented enforcement of a land contract claim against Robert, and allowed foreclosure | Probate court asserted no suitable person had applied and thus would not act; estate was closed for want of an administrator | Reversed in part: court abused discretion by failing to appoint some other suitable person under R.C. 2113.05; remanded with instruction to appoint an administrator |
| Whether alleged judicial bias required reversal | Rodney alleged past complaints and asserted Judge Woessner was biased and retaliating | Probate court implicitly argued rulings are legal decisions, not evidence of bias; jurisdiction to decide disqualification lies with Chief Justice/designee | Not well-taken: appellant presented no evidence of bias; Beer v. Griffith bars appellate courts from vacating judgments on judicial-bias claims; no basis to overturn here |
| Whether probate court had concurrent jurisdiction to intervene in the tax-foreclosure action | Rodney argued probate had concurrent jurisdiction and should have stopped the foreclosure | Probate court noted the estate was closed and no administrator was appointed when foreclosure began, so it could not properly exercise jurisdiction | Not well-taken: probate lacked an active administration when foreclosure commenced; General Division proceeding was appropriately fora for foreclosure |
| Whether remaining assignments (claims about Robert’s misconduct, recovery of property, trust funds, and overall probate failure) are ripe for review | Rodney claimed various errors and sought relief on multiple administration-related grounds | Probate court maintained case closed; these matters depend on estate reopening and appointment of an administrator | Not ripe: court held these issues must await appointment of an administrator and reopening of the estate; assignments 3, 4, 7, 8 not well-taken at this stage |
Key Cases Cited
- Beer v. Griffith, 54 Ohio St.2d 440, 377 N.E.2d 775 (Ohio 1978) (appellate courts lack authority to pass on judge disqualification or void judgment on basis of judicial bias)
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217, 450 N.E.2d 1140 (Ohio 1983) (abuse-of-discretion standard)
- Hecker v. Schuler, 12 Ohio St.2d 58, 231 N.E.2d 877 (Ohio 1967) (no purpose in appointing a fiduciary where no probate assets or beneficiaries exist)
- Wrinkle v. Trabert, 174 Ohio St. 233, 188 N.E.2d 587 (Ohio 1963) (party with claim must procure appointment of an administrator if none exists)
- Govt. Natl. Mtge. Ass'n v. Smith, 28 Ohio App.2d 300, 277 N.E.2d 233 (Ohio Ct. App.) (concurrent jurisdiction between probate and common pleas where an executor/administrator is appointed; first court to acquire jurisdiction retains it)
- Hoffman v. Fleming, 66 Ohio St. 143, 64 N.E. 63 (Ohio 1902) (probate court jurisdiction over testamentary matters)