West v. Child

30 Ohio Law. Abs. 231, 16 Ohio Op. 31, 1939 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 898
CourtOhio Probate Court
DecidedSeptember 30, 1939
DocketNo. 5176
StatusPublished

This text of 30 Ohio Law. Abs. 231 (West v. Child) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Probate Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
West v. Child, 30 Ohio Law. Abs. 231, 16 Ohio Op. 31, 1939 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 898 (Ohio Super. Ct. 1939).

Opinion

OPINION

By MYERS, J.

This matter comes on to be heard upon the motion of Lida West, administratrix of the estate of William A. West, deceased, for confirmation of sale and for distribution of the sale price of real estate sold to pay debts.

Administratrix was appointed as such .on the 17th day of March, 1938, by the Probate Court of Delaware County, Ohio. On the 16th day of December, 1938, she filed in this court her petition .for the sale of certain lands situate in Highland and Clinton counties, near the village of Lynchburg, Ohio, of which an undivided one-half was owned by decedent and one half by Lida' West as an individual. Administratrix as an individual consented that her interest be sold along with decedent’s interest, and the lands were so appraised and sold' at • public sale. No reason being shown why such sale should not be confirmed, an entry of confirmation will be journalized.

As to the matter of distribution, however, there is presented to the court a question on which all parties are not agreed, the property having brought less than the amount of the mortgages thereon. Involved in this sale were two tracts, the Kentucky Joint Stock Land Bank of Lexington having a first mortgage on the first tract and Sylvia W. Child having a first mortgage on the second tract and a second mortga-ge on the first tract. The land bank’s mortgage was to secure the amount of $5,411.90 and interest and it purchased said first tract for $4,950; the mortgage of Sylvia W. Child was to secure the sum of $4,000 and interest; she purchased, the second tract for the sum of $1,000.

The result is that the purchasers must pay the costs required by law, along with the taxes, before deeds can be executed, costs to include such compensation for the fiduciary and fees for her counsel as the law provides. The defendant land bank, while contending that the matter of the fiduciary’s compensation is a matter of discretion in this court, objects to the allowance of any compensation in this case on the grounds that the administratrix is personally liable to it for the deficiency, that no money has passed through her hands, that it was evident at the outset of the proceedings that the creditors would not be benefited by the sale, and that the property was purchased by the mortgagee for less than the mortgage debt. The administratrix at the outset contended that this court had no jurisdiction to allow fees 'for the fiduciary because of the provision of §10510-45, GC. That position has been abandoned and it is now argued that the fee should be based upon the familiar 6%-4%-2% basis provided by §10509-192, GC.

The pertinent statutes are §§10509-192, 10510-45 and 10510-46, GC.

Sec. 10509-192 is as follows:

“Except as otherwise provided by law, executors and administrators may be allowed commissions upon the amount of personal estate collected and accounted for by them, and of the proceeds of real estate sold by order of the court, or under direction of the will, [233]*233which must be received in full compensation for all their ordinary services as follows: for 'the first thousand dollars at the rate of' six per cent; all above that sum, and not exceeding five thousand dollars, at the- rate of four per cent, and all above five thousand dollars at the rate of two per cent.”

This section was enacted, effective January 1, 1932, as r. part of the new Probate Code, and was amended effective September 2, 1935. The 1935 Amendment consisted of the addition of the first six words: “Except as otherwise provided by law.”

See. 10510-45, GC, reads as follows, and stands as it did on its effective date, January 1, 1932:

“When an action to sell real estate is prosecuted by an executor or administrator he shall be allowed by the court from which his letters issued, the compensation provided by law. When such action is by a guardian, his duties and obligations therein shall be considered by the court appointing him in awarding such compensation as the court deems reasonable.” (Emphasis mine.)

Sec. 10510-46, GC, is as follows:

“The sale price of real estate sold shall be applied and distributed as follows:
“1. To discharge the costs and expenses of the sale, including reasonable fees to be fixed by the court for services performed by attorneys for the fiduciary in connection with the sale, and such compensation, if any, to the fiduciary for his services in connection with the sale as the court may deem warranted and fix, which costs, expenses, fees arid compensation shall be paid prior to any liens upon the real estate 'sold and notwithstanding the purchase of such real estate by a lien holder.
“2. To the payment of taxes, penalties, and assessments ‘ then due, against such real estate and to the payment ' of mortgages and judgments against the ward of 'deceased person, according to their respective priorities of lien, so far as they operated as a lien on the real'estate of the deceased at the time of the Sale, or on'the estate of the ward at the time of the sale; which shall be apportioned arid determined by the court, or on reference to a master or otherwise.
“3. In the case on an executor or administrator/thé remaining proceeds of sale shall be applied as follows:
(a) If the action be to sell real estate to pay legacies, to the "payment of legacies with which the real estate of the deceased was charged;
(b) To discharge the claims and debts of the estate, in' the order provided by law;
(c) Whether such executor1 "or administrator was appointed' in this state or elsewhere, the surplus of the proceeds of sale must be considered as real estate and be disposed of accordingly.
4. In the case of a guardian, in the manner and upon the- terms approved by the court where he was appointed.”

This section was amended, effective September 2, 1935, having originally provided in its pertinent parts as follows:

“The money arising from the sale of real estate shall' be applied as follows:
“CD *'TO discharge the costs and expenses Of sale, including reasonable fees for services performed by attorneys for the fiduciary in connection with the sale,' and the commission of the executor or administrator thereon for his administration,'or compensation' of the guardian for his services as fixed by the court.' ' '
“(2) To the payment of mortgages, judgments,' and tax liens against the ward or deceased person *■"*.”

The 1935 amendment resulted,' the court understands, from the decision in the case Of State v Griffith, 127 Oh St 161, wherein it was held that when the mortgagee purchases the property for less than the sum due on the mortgage it can not be'said that mbney arises [234]*234from the sale. The amended section employes the term “sale price” instead of “money arising from the sale” and has been declared to be a valid enactment in the case of Flory v Cripps, 132 Oh St 487, 8 OO 484, paragraph 1 of the syllabus is as follows:

“1.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
30 Ohio Law. Abs. 231, 16 Ohio Op. 31, 1939 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 898, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/west-v-child-ohprobct-1939.