In re Trust of Transue

20 Ohio Law. Abs. 124, 4 Ohio Op. 343, 1935 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 1469
CourtStark County Probate Court
DecidedDecember 4, 1935
StatusPublished

This text of 20 Ohio Law. Abs. 124 (In re Trust of Transue) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Stark County Probate Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re Trust of Transue, 20 Ohio Law. Abs. 124, 4 Ohio Op. 343, 1935 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 1469 (Ohio Super. Ct. 1935).

Opinion

[126]*126OPINION

By McCALL, J.

'‘The judicial power of the State is vested in a Supremo Court, Courts of Appeals, Courts of Common Pleas, Courts of Probate,' and. such other courts inferior to the Courts of Appeals as may from time to time be established by law.”

Sec. I,' Art. IV, Constitution of Ohio (1923).

“The Probate Court shall have jurisdiction in probate and testamentary matters, the appointment of administrators and guardians, the settlement of the accounts of executors, administrators and guardians and such jurisdiction in habeas corpus, the issuing of marriage licenses, and for the sale of .land by executors, administrators, and guardians, and such other jurisdiction, in any county, or counties, as may be provided by law.”

Sec. 8, Art. IV, Constitution of Ohio (1923).

“Except as hereinafter provided, the Probate Court shall have jurisdiction: * * *

4. To appoint and remove guardians and testamentary trustees, direct and control their conduct ,and settle their accounts'.

13. To direct and control the conduct of fiduciaries and settle their accounts.

Such jurisdiction shall be exclusive in the ' Probate Court unless otherwise provided by law.

The Probate Court shall have plenary power in law and in equity fully to dispose of any matter properly before the court, unless the power is expressly otherwise limited or denied by statute.” — §10501-53 GC.

' “Probate Courts have full power to fully •and finally .adjudicate all questions arising in matters properly before them.”

Wilbering v Miller, ,90 Oh St 28-46.

Formerly trust companies could not act as executors, administrators, assignees, guardians, receivers or trustees, but they •are now authorized so to do by. §110-160 GC.

- , “If a sole fiduciary dies, is dissolved, declines to accept, resigns, ia removed, or be- . comes incapacitated, or otherwise unable to act, prior to the termination of the trust, the Probate Court shall require a final account of all dealings of such trust to be filed forthwith by such fiduciary if a living person and able to act; or, if such fiduciary be a living person but unable to act, by his guardian, if any, cir, if there be no guardian, by some other suitable person in his behalf, appointed or approved by the court; or, if such fiduciary be a deceased person, by his. executor or administrator; or, if such fiduciary be a dissolved corporation, by such person or .persons as may be charged by law with winding up the affairs of such corporation. Thereupon the Probate Court shall cause such proceedings to be had as are provided by law as to other accounts filed by fiduciaries.

Whenever such a vacancy occurs and such' contingency is not otherwise provided for by law, or by the instrument creating the trust, or whenever such instrument names no fiduciary whatever, the court shall, either on its own motion, or on the application of any person beneficially interested appoint and issue letters of appointment as fiduciary to some competent person or persons, who shall qualify according to .law, and execute the trust to its proper termination. Such vacancy, and the appointment of a successor fiduciary, shall not affect the liability of the former fiduciary, or his sureties, previously incurred.”— §10506-55 GC.

‘The term fiduciary includes trustee.”— §10504-1 GC.

“Every fiduciary, before entering upon the execution of his trust, shall receive letters of appointment from a Probate Court having jurisdiction of the subject matter of the trust.” — §10504-2 GC.

In the case of Fidelity & Deposit Co.- v Wolfe, 100 Oh St, page 332, Wanamaker, J., at page 335, in discussing §§1 and 8, Art. IV, Constitution of Ohio, and §10591 GC, said:. “The words ‘testamentary matters’ are without limitation. They are as broad and comprehensive as is possible in all trust estates created by will.” * * * “The safeguarding of the fund, not only by constitutional grant of power, but by statutory provision, is left wholly in the discretion of the Probate Court, and its jurisdiction in this behalf is as comprehensive as . any jurisdiction conferred on a Court of" Common Pleas in suits at law or in chancery.”

Sec 10506-39 GC gives the Probate Court authority to hear and determine all matters relative to the manner in ■which the ‘fiduciary has executed his trust and as to the correctness of his accounts, and also ’the'right to compel the rendering of a final [127]*127account at the termination of said trust, and the right to hear and determine all matters relating thereto.

The next section of the Probate Code gives such finding the same force and effect as a judgment at law or a decree in equity, and shall be final as to all persons having notice with certain exceptions.

From the above it will' be noted that ■ Probate Courts in Ohio have been given jurisdiction by the Constitution of the State over probate and testamentary matters, and such other jurisdiction as may be provided by law.

They have’ been given jurisdiction by the Legislature to appoint and remove testamentary trustees, direct and control their conduct and settle their accounts, and such jurisdiction shall be exclusive in the Probate Court unless otherwise provided by law.

The only other provisions provided by law that I know of are §§10506-55 and 10506-39 GC.

The first section provides that if a fiduciary is dissolved prior to the termination of the trust, the Probate Court shall require a final account of all dealings of such trust to be filed forthwith by such fiduciary and, if such fiduciary be a dissolved corporation, by such person as may be charged by law with winding up the affairs of such corporation. Thereupon the Probate Court shall cause such proceedings to be had as are provided by law as to accounts filed by fiduciaries.

The question arises as to what is meant by such proceedings.

The exceptors claim the Probate Court has jurisdiction to hear the exceptions to said accounts and make a finding of the balance due, if any, from the former trustee to the successor trustee. The Superintendent of Banks, as liquidator of the former trustee, claims that it was the liquidator’s duty to file its final account, terminating their relation as fiduciary, that the successor trastee had then the right to file exceptions, and that then the jurisdiction of the Probate Court ceased to settle said account, and that the jurisdiction to settle said account was transferred to the Common Pleas Court of the county where the ■former trustee had its principal place of •business, to-wit: Cuyahoga County, Ohio.

The Probate Court has plenary power at law or in equity to fully dispose of any 'matter properly before it unless such power is expressly otherwise limited or denied by statute.

It is claimed by the Superintendent of Banks, as liquidator, that the Banking Code, by implication, takes the jurisdiction to settle said account out of the Probate Court, and places it in the Common Pleas Court of the county of the place of business of the former trustee. If that be true, it should be expressed in the Banking Code. No such section of the code has been pointed out to the court, and the court is unable to find such a section.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
20 Ohio Law. Abs. 124, 4 Ohio Op. 343, 1935 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 1469, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-trust-of-transue-ohprobctstark-1935.