Segrest v. Segrest
| Citation | 328 So.3d 256 |
| Decision Date | 04 December 2020 |
| Docket Number | 1190676 |
| Parties | Robert SEGREST, Jr. v. Patricia SEGREST, as personal representative of the Estate of Robert C. Segrest, deceased |
| Court | Supreme Court of Alabama |
Neil E. Senkbeil and Mark E. Tippins of Auburn Blackstone Law Group, Auburn, for appellant.
John Michael Segrest of The Segrest Law Firm, Tallassee, for appellee.
Robert Segrest, Jr., appeals the Macon Circuit Court's judgment dismissing his petition to contest the validity of the will of Robert C. Segrest.1 We reverse and remand.
On November 15, 2018, Robert C. Segrest, a resident of Macon County, executed a will. In his will, Robert bequeathed to his wife, Patricia Segrest, a defeasible life estate in his real property. That bequest was defeasible because Robert provided that should Patricia leave the property for a period of more than 6 months the real property would pass to his son, John Paul Segrest. Robert also left certain personal property, but no real property, to his son, Robert, Jr. Robert died on November 24, 2018.
On January 22, 2019, Patricia filed in the Probate Court of Macon County a petition for probate of Robert's will and an accompanying petition for issuance of letters testamentary to herself, as the personal representative appointed in Robert's will. In her petition for probate, she listed as Robert's next of kin: herself, Robert's widow; Robert, Jr., a son; and John Paul Segrest, a son. On March 7, 2019, the probate court admitted Robert's will to probate and granted letters testamentary to Patricia, the personal representative. On April 26, 2019, Robert, Jr., filed in the probate court a "Notice of Intent to file Will Contest." In the notice, Robert, Jr., asserted his intent to contest Robert's will in the circuit court; advised Patricia, as the personal representative of Robert's estate, not to sell or distribute any real property in Robert's estate until further notice; and, provided notice of his intent to contest Robert's will to any bona fide purchasers of the property in Robert's estate.
On April 30, 2019, Robert, Jr., filed in the Macon Circuit Court a petition to remove the administration of Robert's estate from the probate court to the circuit court. The petition was captioned and designated as being "In the Circuit Court of Macon, County"; stated the title of the case as "In Re: the Estate of Robert C. Segrest, [Decedent]"; and was accompanied by a filing fee in the amount of $278.00. The clerk designated the case with circuit court case number, CV-19-007. In the petition for removal, Robert, Jr., alleged that he had a vested interest in the administration of Robert's estate, that no final settlement or proceedings in preparation of a final settlement had occurred in the probate court, and that the circuit court could better handle the administration of Robert's estate. On that same day, the circuit court entered an order removing the estate from the probate court to the circuit court and ordered "the judge of probate to transmit to the circuit court the file and all papers in connection with the probate" of Robert's estate.
On May 7, 2019, Robert, Jr., filed in the circuit court a "Petition to Contest Validity of Decedent's Will." The petition was captioned and designated as being "In the Circuit Court of Macon County, Alabama"; stated the title of the case as "In Re: estate of Robert C. Segrest, Decedent"; and set forth the pending circuit court estate-administration case number, CV-19-007. It does not appear that Robert, Jr., paid an additional filing fee when he filed this petition to contest the will. In the petition, Robert, Jr., stated that he was Robert's son and that he brought the will contest pursuant to § 43-8-199, Ala. Code 1975. Robert, Jr., asserted:
(Emphasis added.) Robert, Jr., maintained that the will is invalid because, he said, at the time Robert executed the will Robert was the subject of "much undue influence" by Patricia and lacked testamentary capacity as a result of his failing health and strong medications. The petition was signed by counsel for Robert, Jr.
On May 13, 2020, Robert, Jr., filed a "Petition for Orders to Personal Representative," asking the circuit court to order Patricia, among other things, not to distribute any of the assets in Robert's estate. On June 17, 2020, the circuit court conducted a hearing to address the petition, and on June 19, 2020, the circuit court issued an order, stating that Robert, Jr., was Robert's son and prohibiting Patricia from selling, distributing, or encumbering the assets in Robert's estate. That same day, Patricia filed a motion, entitled "Executor's Motion to Reschedule Hearing." In her motion, Patricia asked that the hearing conducted on June 17, 2019, be "rescheduled." She set forth the following grounds:
(Emphasis added.)
Patricia also filed a document, entitled "Executor's Motion to Alter, Amend or Vacate Order to Personal Representative Dated June 19, 2019," asking the circuit court to vacate its June 19, 2020, order because, she said, she did not receive notice of the petition and hearing and asking the court to add her, as the personal representative of Robert's estate, as a party to the proceedings removed from the probate court. In her motion, Patricia acknowledged that on May 7, 2019, Robert, Jr., had filed a petition contesting the validity of Robert's will.
On June 20, 2019, the circuit court issued an order granting Patricia's motion to vacate the order issued on June 19, 2019, and setting a hearing to address the matter. On July 26, 2019, after conducting a hearing, the circuit court entered an order requiring Patricia to submit an inventory and prohibiting Patricia "from selling, encumbering, or transferring any interests in the real estate along with any and all other personal property or intangible assets of [Robert's] estate, without prior approval of the court."
On July 30, 2019, Robert, Jr., filed a motion to appoint a special process server pursuant to Rule 4(i)(B), Ala. R. Civ. P., to obtain service of process on Patricia and John Paul "in the heretofore filed contest of will." On August 1, 2019, the circuit court appointed a special process server. The circuit court's order showed the title of the case as "Segrest, Robert C. v. Defendant" and set forth the circuit court estate-administration case number, CV-19-007.
On September 16, 2019, Patricia, as personal representative of Robert's estate, filed a motion to dismiss the will-contest petition filed by Robert, Jr. In her motion, Patricia argued that, because, she said, Robert, Jr., had not complied with the statutory requirements for filing a will contest after an estate had been admitted to probate, the jurisdiction of the circuit court had not been invoked over the will-contest action and that, therefore, the petition was due to be dismissed. She maintained that, because Robert, Jr., filed his petition after Robert's will had been admitted to probate and because no will contest had been filed in the probate court, § 43-8-199 provided the only means for commencing a will contest. She then directed the court to § 43-8-199, which provides that, after a will has been admitted to probate, a person can file a complaint in the circuit court in the county in which the will was probated, contesting the validity of a will within six months after the admission of the will in probate court. She asserted that the "petition to contest the validity of the Last Will and Testament of Robert C. Segrest was not filed as a separate proceeding ..., nor was it filed prior to the probate of the will in probate court, and is due to be dismissed." (Emphasis added.) She reasoned that because Robert, Jr., did not file a will-contest action in the circuit court, i.e., initiate a direct, original action, separate from the case administrating Robert's estate, within six months after the admission of Robert's will to probate, the circuit court did not have jurisdiction over the case. She argued:
To continue reading
Request your trial
- TitleMax of Ala., Inc. v. Falligant
-
Barnett v. Hull
...decedent's valid will or by the laws of descent and distribution of this State. See § 43-8-1 et seq., Ala. Code 1975." Segrest v. Segrest, 328 So.3d 256, 266 (Ala. 2020) (footnote omitted; emphasis In Segrest, we further observed the following with regard to the process of removing the admi......
-
Martin v. Martin
...577 So. 2d 893, 896 (Ala. 1991) ).Currently, only five Alabama probate courts may exercise equitable jurisdiction. See Segrest v. Segrest, 328 So.3d 256 (Ala. 2020). The Jefferson Probate Court and the Mobile Probate Court share equity jurisdiction with circuit courts by local act. See Act.......