1. A. Unless prohibited by order of the district court and except for estates being administered by supervised personal representatives, a personal representative may close an estate administered under the summary procedures of Section 45-3-1203 NMSA 1978 by filing with the court, at any time after disbursement and distribution of the estate, a verified statement stating that:

   1. (1) to the best knowledge of the personal representative, the value of the entire estate, less liens and encumbrances, did not exceed the family allowance, personal property allowance, costs and expenses of administration, reasonable necessary medical and hospital expenses of the last illness of the decedent and reasonable funeral expenses;
   2. (2) the personal representative has fully administered the estate by disbursing and distributing it to the persons entitled thereto; and
   3. (3) the personal representative has sent a copy of the closing statement to all distributees of the estate and to all creditors or other claimants of whom he is aware whose claims are neither paid nor barred and has furnished a full account in writing of his administration to the distributees whose interests are affected.
2. B. If no actions or proceedings involving the personal representative are pending in court one year after the closing statement is filed, the appointment of the personal representative terminates.
3. C. A closing statement filed under this section has the same effect as one filed under Section 45-3-1003 NMSA 1978.

History: 1953 Comp., § 32A-3-1204, enacted by Laws 1975, ch. 257, § 3-1204; 1983, ch. 194, § 9.

ANNOTATIONS

Official comments. — See Commissioners on Uniform State Law official comment to 3-1204 UPC.

Compiler's notes. — This section includes within its scope some of the functions of former 31-1A-3, 1953 Comp.

Authority to reopen probate and vacate verified statement. — Where the trial court determined that a fraudulent conveyance by the decedent and the failure to notify plaintiff of the probate proceedings improperly thwarted plaintiff's efforts to satisfy his judgment against decedent, and ordered the verified statement vacated and the probate matter reopened, and where after the filing of their notice of appeal the court entered an order appointing a new administrator for decedent's estate, the order implemented the judgment in this case which provided that such a person would be appointed. Because defendants did not seek to file a supersedeas bond to preserve the status quo, the judgment of the trial court remained in effect and could be enforced. Beagles v. Espinoza, 1990-NMCA-121, 111 N.M. 206, 803 P.2d 1111.

Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 33 C.J.S. Executors and Administrators § 5; 34 C.J.S. Executors and Administrators § 837.