Close
Updated:

Illinois Appellate Court Reverses Appointment of an Administrator in an Intestate Probate Estate Relying on Preferences of the Probate Act

Marcellis Stinnette Sr. (“Marcellis Sr.”) was shot and killed by a Waukegan police officer on Oct. 20, 2020. At the time, Marcellis Sr. was in a car driven by Tafara Williams, the mother of his son, Marcellis Jr., while she was attempting to flee the police. The police officer was charged with second degree murder. Williams filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the City of Waukegan. Zhavellis Holmes, Marcellis Sr.’s mother, filed a wrongful death civil rights action. Both had been stayed pending the outcome of the criminal case against the police officer.

Holmes was appointed as administrator of Marcellis Sr.’s estate, but Williams filed a counterpetition, seeking to be the appointed administrator and her son, Marcellis Jr., to be identified as his son and sole heir. A DNA test established that Marcellis Jr. was in fact Marcellis Sr.’s son. Trial court ultimately granted Holmes’s petition to be appointment administrator and denied Williams’s counter petition, with the note that the court would supervise the administration.  Williams appealed.

The appellate court entered an order for supplemental briefing on two points: Whether §9-3 of the Illinois Probate Act controls whether Holmes can be appointed administrator over the minor child’s nomination of an administrator via guardian, and whether §9-1of the Probate Act disqualifies Williams for being appointed administrator due to the pending felony charges.

At the appellate level, Williams argued the circuit court erred in appointing Holmes as administrator rather than her.  Williams asserted Holmes was not qualified to be appointed administrator of Marcellis Sr.’s estate, she was not an “interested person” and she was not an heir of his estate.

The appellate court first emphasized it is not necessary to be an “interested person” to be appointed administrator, and as such Holmes was not disqualified. However, the appellate court noted that §9-3 of the Probate Act sets out an order of preference for appointed administrators.

In relevant order, it is first the decedent’s surviving spouse, then legatees, especially children, then the decedent’s children, then grandchildren, then parents.

In this case, the trial court passed on Marcellis Jr., the child, to appoint Holmes, the parent. The appellate court agreed that this was in error. Holmes argued that, at the time the trial court appointed her guardian of Marcellis Sr.’s estate, Williams had not been officially appointed guardian of Marcellis Sr.’s estate, so the appointment was not in error.

The appellate court disagreed, finding the circuit court’s appointment was premature and effectively overrode §9-3 of the Probate Act. In addition, the appellate court found the trial court erred in not holding an evidentiary hearing before ruling on respective petitions for appointments as administrator of the estate and then ruling immediately on the petitions without providing due and proper notice or any opportunity to offer evidence or argument.

Accordingly, the appellate court vacated the decision of the trial court and remanded the matter for further proceedings.

In Re Estate of Marcellis Stinnette, Deceased, 2014 IL App (2d), 230174 (May 3, 2024).

Kreisman Law Offices has been handling probate litigation, estate and trust, and estate planning for individuals, families and loved ones for more than 48 years in and around Chicago, Cook County and its surrounding areas, including Carol Stream, Oak Brook, Lombard, Schaumburg, Barrington Hills, Wheeling, Long Grove, Hawthorne Woods, Maywood, LaGrange, Hinsdale, Hickory Hills, Palos Heights, Orland Park, Chicago (Pullman, East Side, South Shore, Chicago Lawn, Garfield Ridge, Little Village, Back of the Yards, McKinley Park, West Loop, South Loop, Noble Square, Lakeview, Buena Park, Irving Park, Horner Park, Edgewater, Norwood Park East), Morton Grove, Evanston, Elmhurst, Elmwood Park and Flossmoor, Ill.

Robert D. Kreisman has been an active member of the Illinois and Missouri bars since 1976.

Related blog posts:

Illinois Appellate Court Holds When More Than Two Years Have Passed After Decedent’s Death, Mortgagee May Not Initiate a Foreclosure

Illinois Appellate Court Affirms Distribution of $9 Million Estate to Unrelated Individuals

Illinois Appellate Court Affirms Summary Judgment in Favor of the Estate on Claimed Defendant by Dead Man’s Act

 

Contact Us