A Court Ruling on Exceptions to an Estate Accounting is Not a Final Appealable Order Unless the Accounting or Inventory is Approved or Settled

In re Estate of Joseph M. Ross 11th Dist. No. 2012-T-0093, 2013 Ohio 2622. Individual filed exceptions to an amended inventory making several allegations, including that a transaction between him and the decedent was a gift, rather than a loan to be repaid to the Estate. The probate court denied the individual's exception, deemed the transaction between the individual and decedent as a loan to be repaid to the Estate, and continued the hearing of the individual's other exceptions to a later date. The individual appealed the court's denial of his exception to the inventory. The appeal was dismissed for lack of a final appealable order because there were other exceptions to the inventory still pending. The court's denial of the exception under these circumstances does not constitute a final, appealable order because the inventory was not approved or settled.

Ohio Supreme Court finds statutory basis to provide indigent wards with appointed counsel for guardianship-review cases. McQueen v. Court of Common Pleas of Cuyahoga County, Probate Division, 135 Ohio St.3d 291 (2013). The Ohio Supreme Court reversed the 8th District Court of Appeals in holding that guardianship-review hearings must be conducted in accordance with Ohio statutory requirements for hearings. And that these requirements include an indigent ward's right to be appointed counsel at court expense. This holding recognized that probate courts in Franklin, Summit, Medina, and Logan Counties already follow this practice. Now it will be followed across the state of Ohio. In this case, the indigent plaintiff challenged whether the guardianship was necessary and requested the probate court appoint him an attorney. When the probate court denied his request, the indigent plaintiff filed a writ of mandamus to compel the probate court to appoint counsel to him pursuant to R.C. §§ 2111.49 and 2111.02. While the Supreme Court recognized there is no general right of counsel in civil litigation, indigent persons have a right to appointed counsel at state expense when a statute provides for it. The Supreme Court recognized that R.C. § 2111.02(C) provides authority for the appointment of counsel to indigent persons for guardianship-appointment hearings. R.C. § 2111.49 governs review hearings for existing guardianships and states that hearings challenging the guardianship 120 days after the guardian's appointment shall be in accordance with R.C. § 2111.02. Because R.C. § 2111.02(C)(7)(d)(i) confers the right for an indigent person to have counsel appointed at the court's expense for guardianship-review cases, the Supreme Court determined the indigent plaintiff was entitled to his requested relief in mandamus.