WA-Probate > Probate-Litigation > Re-Opening the Estate

L.  Re-Opening the Estate

1.  As Long as an Estate Remains Open, It May Be Sued

Any issue regarding the administration of an estate may be judicially determined by bringing an action under TEDRA.  RCW 11. 96A.030(1)(b) & RCW 11.96A.080(1)

2.  Once the Estate Has Been Closed, Generally It May No Longer Be Sued

In general, if a probate estate has been closed, it may not be re-opened, for example, so that its Personal Representative may be sued for breach of fiduciary duty.  RCW 11.96A.070(2)

3.  Exceptions to the General Rule

An estate may be re-opened so that:

• Newly discovered estate property may be inventoried and distributed.  A decree of distribution is final as to status of property included in it, but it is not determinative of property not so included.  Estate of Price, 53 Wn.2d 393 (1959), rev. denied 128 Wn.2d 1012 (1996).  If a Personal Representative omits property from the Inventory & Appraisement, such omission is not res judicata and binding.  Laughlin v. March, 19 Wn.2d 868 (1944).  See: Re-Opening the Probate to Include Property Omitted from the Inventory.
   

• It may be sued by persons who failed to receive proper notice of its opening or closing:
   

  • In Westhagen v. Harby, 78 Wn.2d 934 (1971), the Personal Representative alleged that she and her brother were Decedent's only heirs, ignoring five in Norway and one in Germany, none of whom received notice of the beginning of probate or of its distribution at closing.  The Court held:

• In Estate of Walker, 10 Wn. App. 925 (1974), where no notice was sent to 16 $1,000 legatees, the Court held that the jurisdictional defect renders the decree of distribution voidable, not void --- the Court having jurisdiction over those who appeared or otherwise received proper notice --- but that a decree of distribution is subject to collateral attack by those not receiving notice.
   

• In Estate of Little, 127 Wn. App. 915 (2005), where no notice was sent to any heir, the Court held that the estate could be re-opened unless the PR could show the heirs'  names and addresses were not reasonably ascertainable through the exercise of due diligence.

• It may be sued for fraud or concealment of assets by the Personal Representative.  Meryhew v. Gillingham, 77 Wn. App. 752 (1995).  The statute of limitations for a fraud action is three years after discovery.  RCW 4.16.080(4)

©