State ex rel. Scherber v. Probate Court of Hennepin Cnty.

• Decision Date: 16 April 1920
• Docket Number: No. 21687.,21687.
• Citation: 177 N.W. 354,145 Minn. 344
• Parties: STATE ex rel. SCHERBER v. PROBATE COURT OF HENNEPIN COUNTY et al.
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

145 Minn. 344

177 N.W. 354

STATE ex rel. SCHERBER

v.PROBATE COURT OF HENNEPIN COUNTY et al.

No. 21687.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

April 16, 1920.

Appeal from District Court, Hennepin County; John H. Steele, Judge.

Proceeding in certiorari by the State, on the relation of Theresa Scherber, against the Probate Court of Hennepin County and others, to review an order refusing to extend the time for presentation of claims. From an order quashing the writ, relator appeals. Affirmed.

See, also, 142 Minn. 499, 172 N. W. 210.

Syllabus by the Court

Claims against estates of decedents are not ‘presented’ to the probate court until placed in the custody of the court, or until filed or made a matter of record therein. Handing to and leaving such claims with the administrator is not a compliance with the law.

The probate court is without power to permit a claim to be presented for allowance after the expiration of one year and six months from the making of the order limiting the time for creditors to present claims and the publication of the notice of such order.

Even if the fraudulent representations of the administrator induced a creditor of the decedent to omit to present his claim to the probate court within the limitation above stated, there is no remedy against the estate, for by no act of the administrator can the bar of the nonclaim statute be waived or lifted after once closed. Geo. R. Smith and H. Stanley Hanson, both of Minneapolis, for appellant.

Daniel F. Foley, of Minneapolis, for respondents.

HOLT, J.

The district court of Hennepin county quashed a writ of certiorari granted by it to review an order of the probate court of said county denying relator's petition to extend the time to present a claim against an estate, then in course of administration in that court. The relator appeals.

The order of the probate court does not indicate the ground upon which the petition was denied. However, in the return to the writ of certiorari the probate judge stated that he considered the petition sufficient to warrant the relief asked, but deemed the court without power to act, because more than 18 months had expired since the order was made for creditors to present claims. Without stopping to consider or decide whether this recital by the judge in his return to the writ presents an error which a reviewing court may lay hold of, when the record otherwise shows no ground for reversal, we come directly to the questions argued by counsel in this court, viz.:

(1) May the presentation of a claim against an estate to the administrator thereof be held a compliance with section 7320, G. S. 1913?

(2) If not, has the probate court the power to extend the time for receiving a claim after the expiration of more than 18 months from the time the order to present claims was made and published?

The record discloses that the administrator herein was appointed February 7, 1917, and on the same day the court made and filed the order for creditors to present claims which order was duly published. The petition states that on March 19, 1917, relator verified an itemized claim against the estate and handed the same to the administrator, believing that by so doing she had complied with the law, and relying also upon the assurance of the administrator that nothing more need be done by her with reference to presenting the same to the court. She made no other attempt to present her claim to the court until this petition was filed on December 23, 1919.

Under the common-law practice, and also under statutory regulations in some states, the presentation of claims against the estates of deceased persons is to the executor or administrator; and he passes on the validity thereof. Not so under our Code. The provisions pertinent to the questions here presented are found in sections 7320 to 7327, inclusive, G. S. 1913. Section 7320 provides that the probate court, upon granting letters testamentary, shall make an order limiting the time for creditors to present claims against the estate and fixing the time and place when and where proofs will be heard, and such claims examined and adjusted. The time so limited shall not exceed one year. Notice of the order is given by publication (section 7321). That under our probate practice, presentation of claims against an estate must be made to the court, and not to the administrator, is clear from the fact that the administrator may not pay any claim or receive credit therefor in his account, unless the court, within the time limited by the order referred to, acted thereon. The probate court is a court of record, so that, if any thing is presented to such a court for action, it is made a matter of record therein. Claims of the sort now in controversy must be itemized and verified; hence are written documents. The time of presentation is ordinarily indorsed on the claims, and they are left in the custody of the court. The order in this case required the creditors to file their claims with the court. That this was a proper order, under the practice that obtains in this state, may not be doubted. That presentation means a filing of the claim in court is indicated by sections 7324 and 7325; the first of which requires the administrator to file in court a statement, in writing, of any offsets he claims ‘against any of the claims filed,’ and the second provides that--

‘No claim or demand, or offset thereto, shall be allowed which was barred by the statute of limitations when filed.’

We cannot hold the presentation to the administrator a compliance with the statute.

Relator insists that section 7322 confers power to extend the time to present claims, even after the expiration of the 18-month period therein mentioned. The section now reads:

‘For cause shown, and upon notice to the executor or administrator, the court, in its discretion, may receive, hear, and allow a claim when presented before the final settlement of the administrator's or executor's account, and within one year and six months after the time when notice of the order was given.’

The application of the last clause stands out clearer in the language of the statute in force before the Revised Laws of 1905 took effect. Chapter 82, Laws 1899, amended section 102 of the Probate Code (chapter 46, Laws 1889). That section contained provisions now found in sections 7320 and 7322, G. S. 1913. The sentence and part of a sentence in the amendment, pertinent to the present inquiry and which the revisers recast into a section by itself (7322),...