265 So. 3d 226
Ala.2018Background
- Frances W. Gray (decedent) died testate; her husband Floyd H. Gray was appointed personal representative of her estate and then died; separate probate administrations remained pending in probate court.
- Elizabeth R. Gray became personal representative of the husband’s estate; Fred W. Suggs, Jr. was successor personal representative of the wife’s estate.
- The marital residence (owned as tenants in common) was sold; net proceeds were placed in the law firm’s trust account while the estates were being administered.
- Elizabeth Gray filed a declaratory-judgment action in circuit court seeking disbursement of the husband’s share from the trust account; Suggs moved to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction (denied), then counterclaimed alleging claims about CDs and a diamond necklace.
- Circuit court entered summary judgment directing one-half of the sale proceeds to the husband’s estate and later ruled as to the necklace; Suggs did not appeal on the merits but filed a Rule 60(b)(4) motion asserting the judgments were void for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
- The Supreme Court of Alabama affirmed the judgment as to the trust-account disbursement (circuit court had jurisdiction to grant equitable relief) but vacated the portions of the judgments addressing the CDs and the diamond necklace (those matters were within probate court jurisdiction and the administration was not removed to circuit court).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Gray) | Defendant's Argument (Suggs) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of Rule 60(b)(4) motion | Suggs filed Rule 60(b) too late (62 days after final judgment) | Rule 60(b)(4) relief from a void judgment is not governed by Rule 60(b) time limit; motion timely | Motion timely; Rule 60(b)(4) may be filed after final judgment to attack voidness |
| Circuit court jurisdiction to order disbursement of proceeds held in law-firm trust | Circuit court could entertain declaratory/equitable relief over the dispute about disbursement of funds outside probate control | Probate court retained exclusive jurisdiction over estate administration while probates pending | Circuit court had jurisdiction to decide equitable declaratory claim about those proceeds; that portion of judgment affirmed |
| Circuit court jurisdiction to adjudicate ownership of CDs and diamond necklace asserted in counterclaim | Circuit court could resolve related disputes in same action | Those asset-specific claims fall squarely within probate jurisdiction and administration had not been removed to circuit court | Circuit court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over those estate assets; judgments concerning CDs and necklace vacated |
| Proper procedural vehicle and preclusion of relitigation of jurisdiction | Gray relied on prior denial of Suggs’s motion to dismiss; judgment final | Suggs argued Rule 60(b)(4) proper to attack void judgments despite earlier ruling and lack of appeal | Court treated Rule 60(b) filing as timely for voidness; but substantive jurisdictional errors as to probate assets render those parts of the judgments void despite earlier rulings |
Key Cases Cited
- Insurance Mgmt. & Admin., Inc. v. Palomar Ins. Corp., 590 So.2d 209 (Ala. 1991) (judgment is void only if court lacked subject-matter or party jurisdiction or violated due process)
- Ex parte Vaughan, 539 So.2d 1060 (Ala. 1989) (Rule 60(b) contemplates relief from a final judgment; better practice to file Rule 60(b) only after final judgment)
- In re Dawson's Estate, 346 So.2d 386 (Ala. 1977) (declaratory-judgment relief may be appropriate even where probate remedy exists)
- MacKenzie v. First Alabama Bank, 598 So.2d 1367 (Ala. 1992) (defining a justiciable controversy for declaratory-judgment actions)