Torgerson v. Talbot, 2017 UT App 231

Bret Kouns (Decedent) died June 10, 2015; his sister was appointed personal representative and opened probate proceedings.
On October 7, 2015, Greg Torgerson submitted a creditor’s claim asserting a written lease giving him the right to lease certain real property through 2017; the Estate mailed a disallowance on October 9, 2015.
The Estate filed a probate petition on March 10, 2016 to authorize leasing the Property to someone other than Torgerson; Torgerson did not respond in the probate case but filed a separate declaratory-judgment complaint on March 24, 2016 seeking a judicial declaration that he had lease rights.
The district court granted the Estate’s probate petition and then dismissed Torgerson’s separate declaratory-judgment action as untimely under Utah Code § 75-3-804(2) (60-day probate statute) because Torgerson did not commence the separate proceeding within 60 days of the Estate’s October 9, 2015 denial.
On appeal, Torgerson argued his declaratory action sought specific performance (or equivalent relief) and thus was not a “claim” subject to the 60-day probate limitation; the Estate alternatively argued the probate court had exclusive jurisdiction over the matter.
The Court of Appeals reversed the dismissal, holding the declaratory action was not a “claim” under the Probate Code’s 60-day rule and that the district court had jurisdiction to hear the separate action.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Torgerson’s declaratory-judgment complaint constituted a “claim” under the Probate Code’s 60-day limitations provision	Torgerson: the complaint sought specific performance (declaration/enforcement of a lease) and thus is not a "claim" subject to § 75-3-804(2)	Estate: Torgerson’s asserted lease-right is a claim against the estate and must be brought within 60 days after disallowance	Held: It was not a "claim" for purposes of § 75-3-804(2); the complaint was not time-barred under that provision
Whether the probate court had exclusive jurisdiction such that a separately filed declaratory action was barred	Torgerson: district court has general civil jurisdiction and may hear separate suits; no statute grants exclusive probate jurisdiction	Estate: probate court has jurisdiction over all estate-related subject matter, so separate suit was improper	Held: No exclusive jurisdiction shown; district court had jurisdiction to hear the separate declaratory action

In re Estate of Sharp, 537 P.2d 1034 (Utah 1975) ("claim" in Probate Code does not include specific performance actions)
Bradshaw v. McBride, 649 P.2d 74 (Utah 1982) (reiterating that Probate Code "claims" exclude specific performance)
Cruz v. Middlekauff Lincoln-Mercury, Inc., 909 P.2d 1252 (Utah 1996) (standard of review for Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal)
Dimmitt v. City Court of Salt Lake City, 444 P.2d 461 (Utah 1968) (exclusive jurisdiction requires clear legislative intent)