In re: Estate of B. Ray Thompson, Sr., B. Ray Thompson, Jr., Individually and as Co-Trustee Under An Agreement with B. Ray Thompson Sr. v. Lindsay Young, Carl C. Ensor, Jr., and Merle D. Wolfe

CourtCourt of Appeals of Tennessee
DecidedJanuary 6, 1997
Docket03A01-9602-PB-00075
StatusPublished

This text of In re: Estate of B. Ray Thompson, Sr., B. Ray Thompson, Jr., Individually and as Co-Trustee Under An Agreement with B. Ray Thompson Sr. v. Lindsay Young, Carl C. Ensor, Jr., and Merle D. Wolfe (In re: Estate of B. Ray Thompson, Sr., B. Ray Thompson, Jr., Individually and as Co-Trustee Under An Agreement with B. Ray Thompson Sr. v. Lindsay Young, Carl C. Ensor, Jr., and Merle D. Wolfe) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Tennessee primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re: Estate of B. Ray Thompson, Sr., B. Ray Thompson, Jr., Individually and as Co-Trustee Under An Agreement with B. Ray Thompson Sr. v. Lindsay Young, Carl C. Ensor, Jr., and Merle D. Wolfe, (Tenn. Ct. App. 1997).

Opinion

I N THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

EASTERN SECTI ON FILED January 6, 1997

Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate C ourt Clerk

I N RE: ESTATE OF B. RAY ) BLOUNT COUNTY THOM PSON, SR. ) 03A01- 9602- PB- 00075 ) B. RAY THOM PSON, J R. , ) I n d i v i d u a l l y, a nd a s Co- Tr us t e e ) Un d e r An Agr e e me nt wi t h B. Ra y ) Th o mp s o n , Sr . , Da t e d ) J a n u a r y 9, 1987 ) ) Pe t i t i one r - Appe l l a nt ) ) HON. HUGH E. De LOZI ER, J R. , v. ) J UDGE ) LI NDSAY YOUNG, CARL C. ENSOR, ) J R. , a n d M ERLE D. W OLFE, ) I n d i v i d u a l l y a nd a s Exe c ut or s ) u n d e r t he wi l l of B. Ra y ) Th o mp s o n , Sr . , De c e a s e d ) ) Re s ponde nt s - Appe l l e e s ) VACATED AND REMANDED

R. LOUI S CROSSLEY, J R. , OF KNOXVI LLE; EUGENE G. PARTAI N a nd J AMES C. SNYDER, J R. , OF ATLANTA, GEORGI A FOR APPELLANT

DAVI D T. BLACK OF MARYVI LLE a nd MARK BAKER OF HOUSTON, TEXAS FOR APPELLEE LI NDSAY YOUNG

GEORGE W M . ORTON OF KNOXVI LLE FOR APPELLEES CARL C. ENSOR, J R. , a nd MERLE D. WOLFE

O P I N I O N

Godda r d, P. J . W gr a nt e d a Rul e 9 a ppe a l i n t hi s c a s e t o r e s ol ve a n e

i mp a s s e be t we e n t he Ci r c ui t Cour t f or Bl ount Count y, Equi t y

Di v i s i o n, a nd t he Pr oba t e Cour t f or Bl ount Count y- - whi c h by

Pr i va t e Ac t i s t he Ge ne r a l Se s s i ons Cour t - - t o de t e r mi ne whi c h

Co u r t h a s j ur i s di c t i on t o r e s ol ve t he a l l e ga t i ons of t he

c o mp l a i nt i n t hi s c a s e .

B. Ra y Thomps on, Sr . , a r e s i de nt of Bl ount Count y, d i e d

o n Oc t o be r 22, 1987, a nd hi s l a s t wi l l a nd t e s t a me nt wa s pr oba t e d

i n t h e Pr oba t e Cour t f or Bl ount Count y. On Nove mbe r 10, 1994, a

p e t i t i o n wa s f i l e d i n t he Pr oba t e Cour t , s e e ki ng t o c l os e t he

es t at e. I n r e s pons e t o t he pe t i t i on, hi s s on, B. Ra y Thomps on ,

J r . , i n di vi dua l l y a nd a s a c o- t r us t e e unde r a n a gr e e me nt wi t h h i s

f a t h e r , da t e d J a nua r y 9, 1987, f i l e d a pe t i t i on on M y 15, 1994 , a

s e e k i n g r e mova l of t he Exe c ut or s of t he Es t a t e , a nd da ma ge s by

r e a s o n of t he Exe c ut or s br e a c hi ng t he i r f i duc i a r y dut i e s .

The s pe c i f i c c ompl a i nt s a r e s umma r i z e d i n t he Son' s

b r i e f , a s f ol l ows :

Fi l e d a doc ume nt wi t h t he I nt e r na l Re ve nue Se r vi c e whi c h a ppe a r s o n i t s f a c e t o ha ve be e n f a l s i f i e d;

Pa i d mi l l i ons of dol l a r s of pur por t e d pl e dge s a nd de bt s o f t h e de c e a s e d wi t hout a ut hor i z a t i on unde r t he wi l l or t he l a w;

Pa r t i c i pa t e d i n or c ondone d t r a ns a c t i ons i n whi c h t he y or o t he r Exe c ut or s ha d a pe r s ona l or f i na nc i a l i nt e r e s t t o t h e d e t r i me nt of t he Es t a t e ;

2 Ca us e d t he Es t a t e t o pa y Te nne s s e e i nc ome t a xe s f or whi c h i t wa s n ot l i a bl e ;

Fa i l e d t o t i me l y f i l e a t a x r e t ur n r e s ul t i ng i n a l os s of a r e f und of ove r $150, 000;

Fa i l e d t o d e t e c t a nd pur s ue l e ga l a nd a c c ount a nt ma l pr a c t i c e c l a i ms ;

Pa i d t he ms e l ve s e xe c ut or ' s c ommi s s i ons a nd a t t or ne y' s f e e s t o Exe c ut or Li nds a y Young' s l a w f i r m wi t hout s e e ki ng t he c o ur t a ppr ova l t ha t wa s r e qui r e d of t he m by l a w;

Un dul y pr ol onge d t he a dmi ni s t r a t i on of t he Es t a t e ; a nd

Ot he r wi s e t ook i mpr ude nt a nd una ut hor i z e d a c t i ons t o t he d e t r i me nt of t he Es t a t e a nd i t s be ne f i c i a r i e s .

On J une 26, 1995, t he Exe c ut or s f i l e d a pe t i t i on f or

r e mo v a l , f or c e r t i or a r i a n d s upe r s e de s , a nd a c ompl a i nt f or

d e c l a r a t or y r e l i e f i n t he Ci r c ui t Cour t f or Bl ount Count y, Equ i t y

Di v i s i o n, s e e ki ng t o r e move a nd t r a ns f e r a dmi ni s t r a t i on of t he

Es t a t e t o t he Ci r c ui t Cour t . On t he s a me da t e , t h e Exe c ut or s

f i l e d a mot i on t o di s mi s s t he Son' s pe t i t i on i n t he Pr oba t e

Co u r t .

A he a r i ng wa s he l d i n t he Ci r c ui t Cour t on J ul y 17, a n d

o n Se p t e mbe r 18, a j udgme nt wa s e nt e r e d di s mi s s i ng t he pe t i t i on

o n t h e gr ound t ha t t he Ci r c ui t Cour t l a c ke d j ur i s di c t i on t o gr a n t

t h e r e l i e f s ought .

On De c e mbe r 13, t he Pr oba t e Cour t , s ua s pont e , e nt e r e d

a me mo r a ndum opi ni on a nd o r de r di r e c t i ng t he Cl e r k of t he Pr ob a t e

Co u r t t o c e r t i f y t he p e t i t i on, t o ge t he r wi t h a l l t he pl e a di ngs t o

3 t h e Ci r c ui t Cour t f or f ur t he r pr oc e e di ngs , ba s e d upon t he

f o l l o wi ng c onc l us i ons :

1. Tha t whi l e t he Pr oba t e Cour t f or Bl ount Co unt y, Te nne s s e e ha s s ubj e c t ma t t e r j ur i s di c t i on ove r s o me i s s ue s r a i s e d i n t he Pe t i t i on, i t s l i mi t e d, s t a t ut or y j ur i s di c t i on i s e xc e e de d i n ot he r s .

2. Tha t t he Pr oba t e Cour t f or Bl ount Count y, Te nne s s e e ha s no a ut hor i t y t o e mpa ne l a j ur y.

On De c e mbe r 15, 1995, t he Son f i l e d a pe t i t i on i n

Pr o b a t e Cour t r e que s t i ng a n i nt e r l oc ut or y a ppe a l pur s ua nt t o Ru l e

9 o f t h e Te nne s s e e Rul e s o f Appe l l a t e Pr oc e dur e , whi c h wa s

u l t i ma t e l y gr a nt e d by t he Pr oba t e Cour t a nd t hi s Cour t .

Pr oba t e j ur i s di c t i on i n t hi s St a t e ha s ha d a c he c ke r e d

pa s t . I n r e s ol vi ng t he i s s ue s r a i s e d i n t hi s a ppe a l i t i s

n e c e s s a r y t ha t we e xa mi ne Publ i c a nd Pr i va t e Ac t s , a nd a n

a me n d me nt t o our St a t e Con s t i t ut i on.

W be gi n our di s c us s i on wi t h Cha pt e r VI of t he Publ i c e

Ac t s o f 1835 whi c h- - a s pe r t i ne nt t o t hi s a ppe a l - - a f t e r pr ovi di n g

f o r a c ount y c our t c ompos e d of J us t i c e s of t he Pe a c e , a ddr e s s e d

p r o b a t e j ur i s di c t i on a s f ol l ows :

Se c . 2 . Be i t e nac t e d, Tha t i t s ha l l be t he dut y of t he j u s t i c e s of t he pe a c e t o a t t e nd a t t he c our t hous e s of t h e r e s pe c t i ve c ount i e s on t he f i r s t M onda y i n e ve r y mo nt h; a nd one t hi r d, or t we l ve of t he a c t i ng j us t i c e s i n e a c h c ount y, s ha l l be a c ompe t e nt quor um t o do a nd t r a ns a c t a l l ki nds of publ i c or c ount y bus i ne s s p r e s c r i be d b y t hi s a c t , e xc e pt t o a s s e s s a t a x, or t o a p pr opr i a t e publ i c mone y, whi c h s ha l l r e qui r e a

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Waters v. STATE, EX REL., SCHMUTZER
583 S.W.2d 756 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1979)
Ferguson v. Moore
348 S.W.2d 496 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1961)
Dick v. Dick
443 S.W.2d 472 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1969)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
In re: Estate of B. Ray Thompson, Sr., B. Ray Thompson, Jr., Individually and as Co-Trustee Under An Agreement with B. Ray Thompson Sr. v. Lindsay Young, Carl C. Ensor, Jr., and Merle D. Wolfe, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-estate-of-b-ray-thompson-sr-b-ray-thompson-jr-individually-tennctapp-1997.