Estate of Bell

California Court of Appeal Apr 23, 1943 No. Civ. No. 6846Published

Before: Thompson

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that proper notice of the initial hearing on an administrator's final account confers jurisdiction over all interested parties, and those parties have a duty to monitor subsequent continuances. Furthermore, there is no right to a jury trial for objections to an administrator's account, and the court did not abuse its discretion in failing to order additional notice.

Issues

Whether the probate court lacked jurisdiction to settle the final account due to the absence of the appellants at the hearing.
Whether the probate court abused its discretion by failing to order additional notice of the continued hearing.
Whether the appellants were entitled to a jury trial regarding their objections to the administrator's account.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“It has been uniformly held that notice of the hearing of an account, given in the manner and form required by law, confers jurisdiction of the res involved on the court and brings all interested parties before it for that purpose.”

“After notice has been properly given in the first instance, it becomes the duty of all interested parties to keep themselves informed by diligent inquiry of subsequent continuances of the hearing.”

“It has been frequently held that since the Probate Code does not specifically authorize a trial by jury upon issues raised by objections to an administrator's account, that right does not exist.”

58 Cal.App.2d 333 (1943) Estate of ALBERT C. BELL, Deceased. HELEN ERMA ELLIS et al., Minors, etc., Appellants,

ORR M. CHENOWETH, as Administrator, etc., Respondent.

Civ. No. 6846. California Court of Appeals. Third Dist.

Apr. 23, 1943. J. Oscar Goldstein and Burton J. Goldstein for Appellants.

Chenoweth & Leininger for Respondent. [335]

THOMPSON, J.

Helen Erma Ellis and Betty Jean Ellis, minor children of Albert C. Bell, deceased, represented by their guardian ad litem, Otis Ellis, have appealed from an order of the Probate Court of Shasta County settling the final account of the administrator of said estate.

The chief contention of the appellants is that the final account of their father's estate was settled without their presence and without the giving of legal notice of that hearing.

Albert C. Bell died intestate December 1, 1937, in Shasta County, California, possessed of real and personal property, and leaving surviving him his widow, Mazie Bell, and the two minor daughters of the deceased, previously mentioned. Josie Bell, the mother of the two minor children, had divorced Albert C. Bell and subsequently married Otis Ellis, and the children assumed his name. Upon application therefor, Orr M. Chenoweth was duly appointed administrator of said estate. Letters of administration were issued December 31, 1937. Notice to creditors was published as required by law. An inventory and appraisement was filed showing the real and personal property to be of the value of $7,317.75. Pending administration, two suits were brought against the estate, each of which was compromised and settled with the approval of the probate court. Another suit to quiet title to a leasehold in the Sacramento Hotel in Redding, California, was brought against said estate and the heirs of Albert C. Bell, deceased, by Twila Bragg and Elizabeth Richards. Josie Ellis and the two minor children, represented by the children's guardian, appeared and answered the complaint in that suit. J. Oscar Goldstein and his son, Burton J. Goldstein, acted as their attorneys. On January 22, 1942, the children and their mother, Mrs. Ellis, abandoned their claim to an interest in the property involved in that action by filing their written consent to a judgment in favor of the plaintiffs. They did not appear at the trial. The estate was represented at that trial by Mr. Chenoweth. Judgment was rendered January 28, 1942, for the plaintiff as prayed for.

Estate of Bell

AI Brief

THOMPSON, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief