Williams v. Faucett
Decision Date | 29 September 1989 |
Citation | 579 So.2d 572 |
Parties | Jerry R. WILLIAMS v. Charlene Knight FAUCETT, et al. James F. WILLIAMS v. Charlene Knight FAUCETT, et al. 87-1519, 87-1520. |
Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Jerry R. Williams, pro se.
Donna Henderson Beard, LaFayette, for appellant James F. Williams.
Edgar C. Gentle III of Schoel, Ogle, Benton, Gentle & Centeno, Birmingham, for appellees Charlene Knight Faucett, Frankie Faye Faucett Schoel and Charles Faucett.
Jerry R. and James F. Williams, residual legatees, appeal from a judgment in favor of Charlene Knight Faucett, Frankie Faye Faucett Schoel, Charles Faucett, specific legatees, and Citizens National Bank of Shawmut ("Bank"), mortgagee of an interest in certain land; in that judgment the court ordered certain lands sold to satisfy specific bequests and to pay debts of the estate.
Dollie Mae Finch, a widow, died on April 26, 1983, leaving a last will and testament that provided, in pertinent part:
Mary Knight Williams predeceased Dollie Mae Finch and, therefore, did not take under the will.
The will was admitted to probate on June 14, 1983, and letters testamentary were issued to Jerry Williams as the executor.
The Finch estate consisted of household furnishings, farm equipment, various other personalty, and certain lands located in Lee and Chambers Counties. A mortgage covering a parcel of the Lee County property was foreclosed upon. Pursuant to the probate court's authorization, the executor sold the other Lee County property to satisfy some of the estate debts. Thus, the only real property remaining in the estate is approximately 840 acres of land in Chambers County; that land is the subject of this action.
A stipulation regarding the amount of money bequeathed by item III in the will was entered into between the executor and Charlene Knight Faucett, which provided, in pertinent part:
Under this stipulation Charlene Knight Faucett's bequest totalled $55,438.30.
The established debts of the estate totalled $45,300. The Bank held a mortgage in the amount of $94,685.51. However, the Bank's mortgage covered only Jerry Williams's residuary interest in the estate.
Neither the bequests nor the remaining estate debts were satisfied during the 4-5 years following the issuance of the letters testamentary. Attempted sales of parcels of the approximately 840 acres were unsuccessful, and the legatees could not agree on a partition in kind.
On June 24, 1987, Charlene Knight Faucett filed a petition to sell the 840 acres for division to satisfy her claim against the estate, contending that an equitable partition in kind was impossible. The petition was amended, joining the other legatees, Frankie Faye Faucett Schoel and Charles Faucett, and requesting that interest accrue on their bequests until they were paid.
On the date the hearing on the petition was held, the executor, acting pro se, filed an answer demanding a jury trial, and averring that the stipulation regarding the value of the bequest in item III of the will did not provide for the accrual of interest and that a sale on the courthouse steps would not result in the estate's receiving a fair price for the property. He also filed a motion for change of venue and a motion for the trial judge to recuse. The motion to recuse was premised upon the fact that all judges of the Fifth Judicial Circuit, which included Chambers County, had been recused in an underlying case in which Jerry Williams and Charlene Knight Faucett sued a Chambers County attorney who was allegedly involved in securing the $94,685.51 loan from the Bank, as to which the 840 acres was mortgaged as security. 1
The trial court refused to grant the jury demand, and denied the motions. After the hearing, the court found that the personalty had a market value of approximately $15,000 and that the 840 acres had a market value of approximately $294,000. The trial court entered a judgment ordering the sale of the estate property and payment of the bequest and estate debts.
The real property was purchased at the judicial sale for $255,000. 2 The trial court confirmed the sale, and ordered the proceeds disbursed to pay the claims against the estate and the expenses of the sale. The remainder of the sale proceeds were paid into the court for disbursement to Jerry and James Williams, the residuary beneficiaries.
James and Jerry Williams appeal, contending that the trial court erred in ordering the estate property sold and in ordering that interest accrue on the bequests. We disagree. The trial court's judgment, in pertinent part, reads:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Pepper v. Bentley
...ad litem to represent an incompetent person when that person is “not otherwise represented” in the action. See, e.g., Williams v. Faucett, 579 So.2d 572, 579 (Ala.1989) (“A review of the record indicates that James was diligently represented by able counsel from the beginning of the case th......
-
Pepper v. Bentley, No. 2070031 (Ala. Civ. App. 5/9/2008)
...ad litem to represent an incompetent person when that person is "not otherwise represented" in the action. See, e.g., Williams v. Faucett, 579 So. 2d 572, 579 (Ala. 1989)("A review of the record indicates that James was diligently represented by able counsel from the beginning of the case t......