McPherson v. McPherson
| Decision Date | 23 December 1960 |
| Docket Number | No. 19183,19183 |
| Citation | 358 P.2d 478,145 Colo. 170 |
| Parties | Leila H. McPHERSON, Administratrix of the Estate of Thomas B. McPherson, Jr., also known as Thomas B. McPherson, also known as T. B. McPherson, Deceased, and and Leila H. McPherson, individually, Plaintiff in Error, v. William S. McPHERSON, Jr., Administrator of the Estate of William S. McPherson, Deceased, Defendant in Error. |
| Court | Colorado Supreme Court |
Emory L. O'Connell, Otto Friedrichs, Denver, for plaintiff in error.
Geo. A. Epperson, Donald F. McClary, Fort Morgan, for defendant in error.
Plaintiff in error was the claimant in the county court of Weld County against the Estate of William S. McPherson, Deceased, No. 8191. The claim was filed by Leila H. McPherson individually and as Administratrix of the Estate of Thomas B. McPherson, Deceased.
A motion to strike upon several grounds was filed as to this claim, but the grounds in which we are interested are laches and the statute of limitations. The motion to strike was treated by the court as a motion to dismiss, and was argued as a defense of laches and the statute of limitations. The motion was sustained, the claim dismissed and final judgment entered against the claimants.
The law applying to claims in probate matters is stated in C.R.S. '53, 152-12-5, as amended by Chapter 290, Laws of 1959, the pertinent part thereof being as follows:
'152-12-5.--Hearing on claims--(1) A claim filed as provided for in section 152-12-7 and not withdrawn by the claimant, unless allowed by the personal representative and classified according to the contention of the claimant, shall be deemed denied by the personal representative, and at any time before final settlement of said estate, upon notice to be given by the claimant, or personal representative, shall stand for hearing. Formal pleadings shall not be required. The issues shall be formed as in actions before justices of the peace, but heard and determined as in civil actions in courts of record; provided, however, that upon the request of any party in interest, or on the court's own motion, the court may, in its discretion and by appropriate notice, order, and direction, require or permit the entire proceeding, or any part thereof, except the filing of claims, to be conducted in accordance with the rules of Civil procedure.
'Every demand shall be proved in the same manner and by like evidence as would be required in other cases where one defends as an administrator.'
It will be noted that this section of the statute provides that upon request of any party interested, or the court upon its own motion, may in its...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pride v. Peterson, 53628
...150. See O'Byrne v. Scofield, 120 Colo. 572, 212 P.2d 867.' Davis v. Bonebrake, supra, was cited with approval in McPherson v. McPherson, 145 Colo. 170, 171, 358 P.2d 478, 479. In Hough v. Menses, Fla., 95 So.2d 410, 412, the court 'Grounds (2) (res judicata) and (4) (the statute of limitat......
-
Campaign Integrity Watchdog, LLC v. Alliance for a Safe & Indep. Woodmen Hills
...be raised in a Rule 12(b)(5) motion to dismiss when the affirmative defense has not been raised in the pleadings. McPherson v. McPherson , 145 Colo. 170, 358 P.2d 478 (1960) ; Smith v. Kent Oil Co. , 128 Colo. 80, 81, 261 P.2d 149, 150 (1953) ; McIntire & Quiros of Colo., Inc. v. Westinghou......
-
Williams v. Rock-Tenn Servs., Inc., Court of Appeals No. 14CA2329
...generally, a party may not raise an affirmative defense in a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. McPherson v. McPherson, 145 Colo. 170, 172, 358 P.2d 478, 479 (1960) ; see Bristol Bay Prods., LLC v. Lampack, 2013 CO 60, ¶ 41, 312 P.3d 1155, 1163.This is so because a plaintiff ha......
- Allander v. Carpenters Dist. Council of Denver and Vicinity, 18580
-
Rule 12 DEFENSES AND OBJECTIONS — WHEN AND HOW PRESENTED — BY PLEADING OR MOTION — MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON PLEADINGS.
...F. Statute of Limitations. Laches and the statute of limitations cannot be raised by motion to dismiss or strike. McPherson v. McPherson, 145 Colo. 170, 358 P.2d 478 (1960). The statute of limitations is not ground for a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can b......
-
Rule 8 GENERAL RULES OF PLEADING.
...by a motion to strike. Laches and the statute of limitations cannot be raised by motion to dismiss or strike. McPherson v. McPherson, 145 Colo. 170, 358 P.2d 478 (1960). The statute of limitations and laches must be affirmatively pleaded in an answer. McPherson v. McPherson, 145 Colo. 170, ......
-
PART 8 CREDITORS' CLAIMS
...the claims on motions improperly raised under the rules of civil procedure agreed by the parties is erroneous. McPherson v. McPherson, 145 Colo. 170, 358 P.2d 478 (1960). The Colorado probate code cannot be deemed to indicate a legislative intent to eradicate all time limitations. In re Est......
-
CREDITORS' CLAIMS
...the claims on motions improperly raised under the rules of civil procedure agreed by the parties is erroneous. McPherson v. McPherson, 145 Colo. 170, 358 P.2d 478 (1960). The Colorado probate code cannot be deemed to indicate a legislative intent to eradicate all time limitations. In re Est......