Ark. Code Ann. § 28-48-201 (2020)
Bond required
- Prior to the issuance of letters and except as provided in § 28-48-206, the court or the clerk, subject to approval or rejection by the court, shall take a bond from the personal representative with two (2) or more sufficient sureties who are residents of this state, or a corporate surety authorized to do business in this state, for the benefit of the interested parties. The bond shall be in an amount fixed by the court not less than double the amount or, if the surety is corporate, then not less than the amount, of the estimated value of the property which may reasonably be expected to pass through the hands of the personal representative.
- When two (2) or more persons are appointed personal representatives of the same estate and are required by the provisions of the Probate Code to give a bond, the court may require either a separate bond from each or one (1) bond from all of them.
- No personal representative shall be deemed a surety for another personal representative unless the terms of the bond so provide.
History. Acts 1949, No. 140, §§ 80, 84; A.S.A. 1947, §§ 62-2211, 62-2215.
Publisher's Notes. The Probate Code, referred to in this section, is codified as set out in the note following § 28-1-101.
Case Notes
Action on Bond.
A cause of action did not accrue upon an administrator's bond until his accounts were settled and an order made by the court directing him to pay the amount found due to the parties entitled to receive it. George v. Elms, 46 Ark. 260 (1885); State ex rel. McCreary v. Roth, 47 Ark. 222, 1 S.W. 98 (1886) (preceding decisions under prior law).
When a probate court made a settlement of a deceased administrator's accounts before an administrator was appointed on his estate, neither the principal nor his sureties were legally before the court, and such settlement would not be a cause of action on the bond. State v. Drake, 52 Ark. 350, 12 S.W. 706 (1889) (decision under prior law).
If the accounts of an administrator showing nothing due from him were confirmed by the probate court, no liability would rest upon his sureties until the settlement thus made was impeached in a court of equity. Crouch v. Edwards, 52 Ark. 499, 12 S.W. 1070 (1889) (decision under prior law).
Authority of Court.
It was within the power of the probate court, on the application of a surety in an administrator's bond, to require the administrator to give a new bond when it was made to appear that the sureties in his bond were insufficient. Renfro v. White, 23 Ark. (10 Barber) 195 (1861) (decision under prior law).
On affidavit filed by interested party in an estate that the administrator was insolvent, it was error for the probate court to revoke the letters of administration without requiring the administrator to give additional bond and without showing that his securities were not ample. Collier v. Kilcrease, 27 Ark. 10 (1871) (decision under prior law).
A probate court had no authority, on application of guardian, to substitute new bonds and sureties for old bonds and sureties theretofore approved and accepted by it for reasons which are not provided by statute. White v. New Amsterdam Cas. Co., 195 Ark. 249, 111 S.W.2d 477 (1937) (decision under prior law).
Contribution by Cosurety.
Where a surety upon a guardian's bond who had been compelled to pay over money due by the guardian upon termination of the fiduciary relation sued his cosurety for contribution, it was no defense that the plaintiff consented that the guardian might retain and use the ward's money by paying interest therefor and that the probate court thereupon made an order reciting such consent and authorizing the guardian to retain the money “until further order.” Berton v. Anderson, 56 Ark. 470, 20 S.W. 250 (1892) (decision under prior law).
Death of Surety.
The liability of a surety on an administrator's bond was not discharged by the surety's death, but extended to the entire term of the administrator. Hecht v. Scaggs, 53 Ark. 291, 13 S.W. 930 (1890) (decision under prior law).
Direction Against Bond in Will.
Where a will provided for appointment of widow as executor without giving bond and without making reports and settlements, the remainderman in the estate had no right to require a bond and an accounting from the widow who was a life tenant, without alleging and proving mismanagement, waste, or conversion. Dillen v. Fancher, 197 Ark. 995, 125 S.W.2d 110 (1939) (decision under prior law).
Where letters testamentary were granted by the clerk, in vacation, he had no discretion in any case to dispense with the bond required by statute, even where the will directed otherwise; rather, in such matters the probate court had a large discretion, which would not be controlled by the Supreme Court, unless abused. Dillen v. Fancher, 197 Ark. 995, 125 S.W.2d 110 (1939) (decision under prior law).
Discharge of Sureties.
The sureties on an administrator's bond could apply to the probate court to be discharged on any statutory ground; however, such an application could not be made under a former statute relating to the discharge of sureties on official bonds. Valcourt v. Sessions, 30 Ark. 515 (1875) (decision under prior law).
Where guardian and sureties were before the probate court and an order permitting substitution of surety, approving new bond, and releasing the sureties on the original bond was made by the court of its own motion, but not entered on the record, an order nunc pro tunc, directing that it be shown on the judgment record, was proper, but the order did not discharge former sureties from liability that might have accrued prior to the order. Williams v. Goodwin, 200 Ark. 897, 141 S.W.2d 515 (1940) (decision under prior law).
Liability of Guardian.
The primary liability of a guardian who had been removed by the court should have been determined before a judgment was entered against the surety on the guardian's bond. Continental Ins. Cos. v. Estate of Rowan, 250 Ark. 724, 466 S.W.2d 942 (1971).
Necessity of Bond.
The giving of a bond by a guardian was held to be a condition precedent to the issuance of letters of guardianship and the authority to act as a guardian. Norris v. Dunn, 184 Ark. 511, 43 S.W.2d 77 (1931) (decision under prior law).
Cited: Sulcer v. Northwestern Nat'l Ins. Co., 263 Ark. 583, 566 S.W.2d 397 (1978).