 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Carter v. Kahler6/8/1995
Judgement reversed and remanded and Opinion filed.
June 8, 1995
O P I N I O N
In this appeal of a claim classification order from a probate court, we must decide whether under TEX. PROB. CODE ANN. Section(s) 322 (Vernon Supp. 1995), the filing of a lawsuit meets the requirements of legal exhibition of a claim. We hold that it does. Underlying this claim is a multi-million-dollar judgement from a medical malpractice suit, in favor of appellants Jesse P. Carter, Jeanne L. Carter, and Jesse Vincent Carter, and against appellee, the Estate of Victor L. Kahler, deceased. The decedent's ex-wife, Janiece Kahler, is a prior claimant and also an appellee. The Carters submitted this claim to the probate court, which determined it was a class-eight claim. In a sole point of error, the Carters challenge this classification and contend that the probate court should have designated the claim as a class-seven claim. We agree, and we reverse.
Priority Claim Classifications
The Legislature has established eight classifications for claims against an estate and has assigned priority of payment accordingly. TEX. PROB. CODE ANN. Section(s) 322. Classification of claims is a function of the probate court. Blair v. State, 640 S.W.2d 867, 869 (Tex. 1982). Claim classes one through six are not relevant to this appeal. The question is whether the Carters' claim falls into class seven or class eight. The relevant portion of the statute reads:
Classification of Claims Against Estates of Decedent Claims against an estate of a decedent shall be classed and have priority of payment, as follows:
. . . .
Class 7. All other claims legally exhibited within six months after the original grant of letters testamentary or of administration.
Class 8. All claims legally exhibited after the lapse of six months from the original grant of letters testamentary or of administration.
TEX. PROB. CODE ANN. Section(s) 322 (emphasis added). We must decide whether the Carters "legally exhibited" their claim against the Kahler estate before or after the six-month window. This requires us to determine whether the Carters "legally exhibited" their claim by filing their lawsuit.
Legally Exhibiting a Claim
On January 8, 1991, the letters testamentary for the independent executor of the Estate of Victor L. Kahler, Deceased were authorized. The estate was under independent administration until April 20, 1993, when letters of administration were granted. On that date the estate was changed from an independent administration to a dependent administration. The Carters filed suit against the Kahler estate, through its executor NCNB Bank (which later changed its name to NationsBank), on February 19, 1991. This filing took place within six months after the original grant of the letters testamentary. The Carters claim that because filing suit satisfied the legal exhibition requirement, their claim should be classified as a class seven claim. Until they obtained their judgement on February 19, 1993, the Carters had only a contingent claim against the estate. The disposal of a contingent claim against an estate in Texas is problematic. The Code does not require that a contingent claim be filed at any time during the administration of an estate. If a contingent claim becomes certain after the estate has been distributed, the distributees will be liable for its payment. COMMENT, Contingent Claims Against Decedents' Estates: A Need for Legislation in Texas, 28 Sw. L.J. 561, 562 (1974).
A contingent claim must be contrasted with a claim for money, authorized in TEX. PROB. CODE ANN. Section(s) 298, whose f
Page 1 2 Texas Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|