Estate of Norton v. Hinds, 73760

Decision Date03 March 1987
Docket NumberNo. 73760,73760
Citation354 S.E.2d 663,182 Ga.App. 35
PartiesESTATE OF Alberta NORTON v. HINDS.
CourtGeorgia Court of Appeals

William M. Phillips, Ringgold, for appellant.

Frank M. Gleason, Rossville, for appellee.

SOGNIER, Judge.

Charles Hinds, Jr. petitioned the probate court of Catoosa County to set aside the grant of a year's support to Alberta Norton approximately two and one-half years after the grant of the year's support and thirteen months after the death of Norton. No legal representative of Norton's estate had been appointed. Hinds had notice served on Norton's former attorney, several of Norton's children and the county administrator. The probate court ultimately reinstated the grant of year's support and Hinds then appealed to the Superior Court of Catoosa County, naming the "Estate of Alberta Norton" as party defendant. The superior court found that "there does not appear from the record in said case that anyone has been appointed by the Probate Judge of Catoosa County to serve as Executor or Administrator of the Estate of Alberta Norton, deceased, nor has there been a substitution of parties, and that more than 180 days has lapsed since her death, ..." Nevertheless, the superior court addressed the merits of Hinds' appeal and reversed the probate court's order regarding the year's support. Appeal was made to this court by a party designated as "Estate of Alberta Norton."

"In every suit brought in this State there must be a real plaintiff and a real defendant. The plaintiff or the defendant may be a natural or an artificial person, or a quasi-artificial person, such as a partnership. If the suit is brought in a name which is neither that of a natural person, a corporation, nor a partnership, it is a mere nullity." Western, etc., R. Co. v. Dalton Marble Works, 122 Ga. 774, 775 (1, 2), 50 S.E. 978 (1905). "In Knox v. Greenfield Estate, 7 Ga.App. 305 (66 S.E. 805) [ (1910) ], it was said 'A suit against a designated estate is not a suit with a real defendant, within the purview of the rule just stated.' Also: 'A dead man can not be sued. The estate of a dead man is mere inanimate property. Suits to bind the estate of a dead man should be brought in the name of a personal representative--an executor, administrator, etc. This is no mere technicality.' " Knight's Pharmacy Co. v. McCall, 181 Ga. 617, 618(2), 183 S.E. 497 (1936). Exceptions to the rule that an estate is not a legal entity which can be a party to legal proceedings have been recognized by the courts where, e.g., the estate was the trade or firm name of disclosed individuals operating under that name, Farmers, etc., Bank v. Farkas, 27 Ga.App. 153, 155, 107 S.E. 610 (1921); or where the actual parties at interest were involved in the litigation of the suit, such as the personal representative of the estate (Block v. Voyager Life Ins. Co., 251 Ga. 162(1), 303 S.E.2d 742 (1983)) or the executor and guardian (Tingle v. Cate, 142 Ga.App. 467, 470, 236 S.E.2d 127 (1977)). These exceptions, however, are inapplicable here where it appears suit was filed in order to bind a non-legal entity, the estate. No personal representative had been named at the time the proceedings were instituted; no personal representative has been properly named in the interval. An application made by one of Norton's children for letters of administration of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Boatright v. Derr
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court
    • 24 Junio 1996
    ...person nor entity); Hogg v. Walker, 622 A.2d 648, 653 (Del.1993) (trust estate not separate legal entity); Estate of Norton v. Hinds, 182 Ga.App. 35, 354 S.E.2d 663, 664 (1987); In re Marriage of Schauberger, 253 Ill.App.3d 595, 191 Ill.Dec. 675, 624 N.E.2d 863, 866 (1993) (estate has no ca......
  • Goss v. Hutchins
    • United States
    • Tennessee Supreme Court
    • 28 Marzo 1988
    ...73 Colo. 327, 215 P. 476 (1923); Schoeller's Estate v. Becker, 33 Conn.Sup. 79, 360 A.2d 905 (Super.Ct.1975); Estate of Norton v. Hinds, 182 Ga.App. 35, 354 S.E.2d 663 (1987); Bavel v. Cavaness, 12 Ill.App.3d 633, 299 N.E.2d 435 (1973); Wilson v. Kings' Estate, 131 Ind.App. 412, 170 N.E.2d ......
  • Bryant v. Estate of Klein, No. M2008-01546-COA-R9-CV (Tenn. App. 4/20/2009)
    • United States
    • Tennessee Court of Appeals
    • 20 Abril 2009
    ...entity and cannot sue or be sued absent certain circumstances such as in a wrongful death action); Estate of Norton v. Hinds, 182 Ga.App. 35, 354 S.E.2d 663, 664 (Ga. Ct. App. 1987)(the estate of a dead man is mere inanimate property; consequently, suits to bind the estate of a dead man sho......
  • Ferrell v. Miller
    • United States
    • Tennessee Court of Appeals
    • 27 Noviembre 2013
    ...entity and cannot sue or be sued absent certain circumstances such as in a wrongful death action); Estate of Norton v. Hinds, 182 Ga. App. 35, 354 S.E.2d 663, 664 (Ga. Ct. App. 1987) (the estate of a dead man is mere inanimate property; consequently, suits to bind the estate of a dead man s......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Wills, Trusts, Guardianships, and Fiduciary Administration
    • United States
    • Mercer University School of Law Mercer Law Reviews No. 74-1, September 2022
    • Invalid date
    ...Id. at n.2. 101. Id. at 433-34, 864 S.E.2d at 631.102. Id. at 436, 864 S.E.2d at 632.103. Id. (quoting Estate of Norton v. Hinds, 182 Ga. App. 35, 36, 354 S.E.2d 663, 664 (1987)).104. In re Suddeth, 361 Ga. App. at 434, 864 S.E.2d at 631.105. Id. at 435, 864 S.E.2d at 631-32.106. Id. at 436......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT