Peekus' Estate, Matter of, Docket No. 51025

• Decision Date: 06 May 1981
• Docket Number: Docket No. 51025
• Citation: 307 N.W.2d 469,106 Mich.App. 268
• Parties: In the Matter of the ESTATE OF Olga PEEKUS, a/k/a Lga B. Peekus, Deceased. Allen HEIM and Joan Engle, Appellants, v. James A. SOMMERFELD, Administrator, and Edmond Piekus, a/k/a Imant Piekus, Appellees. 106 Mich.App. 268, 307 N.W.2d 469
• Court: Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US

Page 469

307 N.W.2d 469

In the Matter of the ESTATE OF Olga PEEKUS, a/k/a Lga B.

Peekus, Deceased.

Allen HEIM and Joan Engle, Appellants, v. James A. SOMMERFELD, Administrator, and Edmond Piekus, a/k/a

Imant Piekus, Appellees.

Docket No. 51025.

106 Mich.App. 268, 307 N.W.2d 469

Court of Appeals of Michigan.

May 6, 1981.

Released for Publication July 13, 1981.

[106 MICHAPP 268] Jack C. Chilingirian, Mount Clemens, for appellants.

J. Russell Labarge, Jr., Roseville, for Sommerfeld.

Marijana Relich, Detroit, for Piekus.

Before R. B. BURNS, P. J., and BASHARA and CAVANAGH.

[106 MICHAPP 269] PER CURIAM.

The decedent, Olga Peekus, willed her estate to the appellants and Edmond Piekus, a resident of Latvia. The appellants filed a motion in the probate court to have funds held in escrow pending a determination of the nonresident alien's right to share in the personal property of the estate. That motion was denied by order entered February 6, 1980, in the Macomb County Probate Court.

The claim of appeal was filed pursuant to M.C.L. § 600.861; M.S.A. § 27A.861, which provides inter alia that a party to a proceeding in the probate court may appeal as a matter of right to the Court of Appeals from a "final order affecting the rights or interests of any interested person in an estate or trust". ¹ Recognizing that a substantial question existed as to the jurisdiction of this Court to entertain an appeal from this probate court order, this Court ordered the parties to file separate briefs on this jurisdictional question. Since the order in question clearly was entered in a decedent's estate, the issue is whether or not the order was a "final" order and therefore appealable to this Court rather than the circuit court.

Since there is no statutory or rule definition of the term "final" as used in M.C.L. § 600.861; M.S.A. § 27A.861, the determination of which probate court orders are "final" and which are not, for purposes of determining the appellate jurisdiction of this Court, has to be made on a case-by-case basis. In re Swanson Estate, 98 Mich.App. 347, 296 N.W.2d 256 (1980). The test of finality of a probate court order is whether it affects with finality the rights of the parties in the subject matter. Equitable Trust Co. v. Bankers Trust Co., 268 Mich. 394, 397-398, 256 N.W. [106 MICHAPP 270] 460 (1934); In re Swanson Estate, supra. The order of the Macomb County Probate Court denying the motion to hold funds in escrow is not dispositive of any of the rights of the parties. We therefore conclude that this order is not a final order appealable as a matter of...