The procedure for securing court approval of a compromise is as follows:
1. The terms of the compromise shall be set forth in an agreement in writing which shall be executed by all competent persons and parents acting for any minor child having beneficial interests or having claims which will or may be affected by the compromise. Execution is not required by any person whose identity cannot be ascertained or whose whereabouts is unknown and cannot reasonably be ascertained.
2. Any interested person, including the personal representative or a trustee, then may submit the agreement to the court for its approval and for execution by the personal representative, the trustee of every affected testamentary trust and other fiduciaries and representatives.
3. After notice to all interested persons or their representatives, including the personal representative of the estate and all affected trustees of trusts, the court, if it finds that the contest or controversy is in good faith and that the effect of the agreement upon the interests of persons represented by fiduciaries or other representatives is just and reasonable, shall make an order approving the agreement and directing all fiduciaries under its supervision to execute the agreement. Minor children represented only by their parents may be bound only if their parents join with other competent persons in execution of the compromise. Upon the making of the order and the execution of the agreement, all further disposition of the estate is in accordance with the terms of the agreement.
Notes of Decisions
In re the Est. of Riley, 266 P.3d 1078 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2011).
· cites it 27× “Because the compromise between Barkley, Joseph, and Mary was not executed by all beneficiaries of the estate, as required by A.R.S. § 14-3952, it is void, and the probate court erred when it approved that compromise.”
In Re the Est. of Mary A. Riley, 295 P.3d 428 (Ariz. 2013).
· cites it 15× “The terms of the compromise shall be set forth in an agreement in writing which shall be executed by all competent persons .”
Wilmot v. Wilmot, 58 P.3d 507 (Ariz. 2002).
· cites it 4× “A.R.S. § 14-3952(1). Our case law reaches the same result.”
N. Trust Bank of Arizona, N.A. v. Goodman, 23 P.3d 108 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2001).
· cites it 5× “” Section 14-3952 authorizes the probate court to approve a compromise under section 14-3951 only if, among other things, it finds that “the contest or controversy is in good faith.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 14-3952(1) — 4 cases
Wilmot v. Wilmot, 58 P.3d 507 (Ariz. 2002).
“A.R.S. § 14-3952(1). Our case law reaches the same result.”
In re the Est. of Riley, 266 P.3d 1078 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2011).
“Because the compromise between Barkley, Joseph, and Mary was not executed by all beneficiaries of the estate, as required by A.R.S. § 14-3952, it is void, and the probate court erred when it approved that compromise.”
In Re the Est. of Mary A. Riley, 295 P.3d 428 (Ariz. 2013).
“The terms of the compromise shall be set forth in an agreement in writing which shall be executed by all competent persons .”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 14-3952(3) — 3 cases
In re the Est. of Riley, 266 P.3d 1078 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2011).
“Because the compromise between Barkley, Joseph, and Mary was not executed by all beneficiaries of the estate, as required by A.R.S. § 14-3952, it is void, and the probate court erred when it approved that compromise.”
N. Trust Bank of Arizona, N.A. v. Goodman, 23 P.3d 108 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2001).
“” Section 14-3952 authorizes the probate court to approve a compromise under section 14-3951 only if, among other things, it finds that “the contest or controversy is in good faith.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.