Roach v. Rowley, 135 S.W.3d 845 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2004, no pet.).
Decedent’s sole heir filed an application for letters of independent
administration. Because there was an assertion that Decedent had a valid
will, the court appointed Temporary Administrator. The probate court
approved Temporary Administrator’s nine applications for interim payment
of fees and expenses. Devisee did not object to these applications.
However, when Temporary Administrator filed an account for final
settlement of Decedent’s estate, Devisee objected to the fees. The
probate court found that Devisee lacked standing to object to the final
accounting.
The appellate court determined that Devisee did have standing to object
to the final accounting. Temporary Administrator argued that Devisee was
attempting to recover property belong to the state by objecting to the
final account and thus lacked standing under Frazier v. Wynn, 472 S.W.2d
750 (Tex. 1971) (holding that before heirs could sue to recover estate
property, they must prove that no administration is pending that that
none is necessary). The court rejected this argument explaining that
Devisee was not attempting to recover estate property but rather was
objecting to the final accounting as an interested person under Prob.
Code § 10.
Moral: An interested person has standing to object to a final account.
Roach v. Rowley, 135 S.W.3d 845 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2004, no pet.).
Decedent’s sole heir filed an application for letters of independent
administration. Because there was an assertion that Decedent had a valid
will, the court appointed Temporary Administrator. The probate court
approved Temporary Administrator’s nine applications for interim payment
of fees and expenses. Devisee did not object to these applications.
However, when Temporary Administrator filed an account for final
settlement of Decedent’s estate, Devisee objected to the fees. The
probate court found that Devisee waived his objection to all the fee
orders.
The appellate court agreed that Devisee had waived his objection by not
filing a timely appeal. The probate court’s orders approving Temporary
Administrator’s applications for the payment of fees and expenses were
final and appealable orders.
Moral: A person dissatisfied with a probate court’s approval of a
personal representative’s fees or expenses should file a timely appeal.