(a) All claims against a decedent’s estate which arose before or at the death of the decedent, including claims of the State and any subdivision thereof, whether due or to become due, absolute or contingent, liquidated or unliquidated, founded on contract, tort or other legal basis, except debts of which notice is presumed pursuant to § 2103 of this title, if not barred earlier by other statute of limitations, are barred against the estate, the personal representative and the heirs and devisees of the decedent unless presented as provided in § 2104 of this title within 8 months of the decedent’s death whether or not the notice referred to in § 2101 of this title has been given.
(b) All claims against a decedent’s estate which arise after the death of the decedent, including claims of the State or any subdivision thereof, whether due or to become due, absolute or contingent, liquidated or unliquidated, founded on contract, tort or other legal basis, unless presented in accordance with § 2104 of this title, are barred against the estate, the personal representatives and the heirs and devisees of the decedent, as follows:
(1) A claim based on a contract with the personal representative, within 6 months after performance by the personal representative is due;
(2) Any other claim, within 6 months after it arises.
(c) Any claim not barred under subsections (a) and (b) of this section which has been rejected by an executor or administrator shall be barred forever unless an action or suit be commenced thereon within 3 months after the executor or administrator has notified the claimant of such rejection by writing delivered to the claimant in person or mailed to the claimant’s last address known to the executor or administrator; provided, however, in the case of a claim which is not presently due or which is contingent or unliquidated, the executor or administrator may consent to an extension of the 3-month period, or to avoid injustice the Court of Chancery, on petition, may order an extension of the 3-month period, but in no event shall the extension run beyond the applicable statute of limitations.
(d) Subsections (a), (b) and (c) of this section shall not apply to claims for legacies or shares of an estate of a decedent.
(e) (1) No claim for a deficiency or otherwise, based on a bond which has been secured by a mortgage on real estate, may be presented against a decedent’s estate, the personal representative and the heirs and devisees of a decedent after the expiration of 8 months from the date of the decedent’s death.
(2) The failure to present a claim on a bond secured by a mortgage on real estate, in accordance with the foregoing provisions, shall not invalidate the bond so as to prevent the foreclosure of the mortgage on real estate at any time thereafter, but no claim may be asserted against the decedent’s estate on or by reason of the bond.
(f) Nothing in this section affects or prevents, to the limits of the insurance protection only, any proceeding to establish liability of the decedent or the personal representative for which the decedent is protected by liability insurance.
(g) No claim against the estate of any decedent in which letters were granted prior to the effective date of this chapter shall be in any way affected by this section, but as to all such claims this section as it existed prior to the effective date of this chapter shall apply.
Code 1852,
§§
1855-1858;
Code 1915,
§
3398;
38 Del. Laws, c. 183,
§
1;
Code 1935,
§
3861;
42 Del. Laws, c. 142,
§§
1, 3, 4;
12 Del. C. 1953,
§
2102;
50 Del. Laws, c. 377,
§§
1-3;
58 Del. Laws, c. 493,
§
1;
59 Del. Laws, c. 384,
§
1;
66 Del. Laws, c. 374,
§
1;
70 Del. Laws, c. 186,
§
1;
81 Del. Laws, c. 150,
§
1;
Notes of Decisions
Witco Corp. v. Beekhuis (1993)
ded · cites it 6×
“The defendants contend that the Delaware nonclaim statute, 12 Del.C. § 2102, applies in this case. Section 2102 provides, in pertinent part: All claims against a decedent’s estate which arose before the death of the decedent .”
Adams v. Jankouskas (1982)
del
“as stated above, this action is based on the theory that decedent wrongfully appropriated petitioner’s property for the benefit of her estate, and that his petition accordingly constitutes a claim not against the wife’s estate but rather against the executor for refusing to…”
Lomax v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance (1991)
ded · cites it 2×
“Plaintiff has filed a motion for partial summary judgment on the grounds that contrary to Nationwide’s affirmative defense assertions, the present action is not barred by the applicable statute of limitations, collateral estoppel and/or res judica-ta. The Plaintiff also seeks…”
Harden v. Allstate Insurance (1995)
ded
“12 Del.C. § 2102(f). There is no dispute that the Estate had liability insurance and said policy was paid in full to plaintiffs.”
Hart v. Parker (2020)
del · cites it 7×
“4 At the motion to dismiss phase, we accept all of plaintiff’s well- pled facts as true and draw all reasonable inferences in plaintiff’s favor. 5 The motion should be granted only if “the plaintiff would not be entitled to recover under any reasonably conceivable set of…”
Hart v. Parker (2019)
delsuperct · cites it 4×
“§ 2104 within eight months of the decedent’s death.* Section 2104 provides three methods for presentation of claims against an estate.”
Adele v. Clifton (2022)
delsuperct · cites it 4×
“69 Given its disposition with regard to the Drejka factors, the court did not reach or analyze the issue of whether Appellant’s claim should be time- barred under 12 Del. C. § 2102 or the doctrine of laches.”
In re Estate of Graham (1971)
delch
“12 Del.C. § 2102(a). A claim was not filed (probated) by the Melson Funeral Home with the Executors nor was it supported by an affidavit filed within the statutory period.”
Ray Wayne Lynch v. Frank Barba (2018)
delch · cites it 3×
“Barba filed a motion for summary judgment in May 2017 asking the Court to dismiss Lynch’s complaint because there are no disputed material facts, determine that Barba has met his fiduciary obligations as trustee and should not be removed as trustee, find Lynch’s claims regarding…”
Anthium, LLC v. Shelton (2019)
delsuperct · cites it 3×
“Harris’s Motion for Summary Judgment A. The Complaint Is Not Time-Barred Harris argues that he is entitled to summary judgment because the Complaint is time-barred pursuant to 12 Del.”
— 12 Del. C. § 2102(a) — 8 cases
In re Estate of Graham (1971)
delch
“12 Del.C. § 2102(a). A claim was not filed (probated) by the Melson Funeral Home with the Executors nor was it supported by an affidavit filed within the statutory period.”
Hart v. Parker (2020)
del
“4 At the motion to dismiss phase, we accept all of plaintiff’s well- pled facts as true and draw all reasonable inferences in plaintiff’s favor. 5 The motion should be granted only if “the plaintiff would not be entitled to recover under any reasonably conceivable set of…”
Hart v. Parker (2019)
delsuperct
“§ 2104 within eight months of the decedent’s death.* Section 2104 provides three methods for presentation of claims against an estate.”
Anthium, LLC v. Shelton (2019)
delsuperct
“Harris’s Motion for Summary Judgment A. The Complaint Is Not Time-Barred Harris argues that he is entitled to summary judgment because the Complaint is time-barred pursuant to 12 Del.”
— 12 Del. C. § 2102(b) — 1 case
— 12 Del. C. § 2102(b)(2) — 1 case
Adele v. Clifton (2022)
delsuperct
“69 Given its disposition with regard to the Drejka factors, the court did not reach or analyze the issue of whether Appellant’s claim should be time- barred under 12 Del. C. § 2102 or the doctrine of laches.”
— 12 Del. C. § 2102(c) — 5 cases
Witco Corp. v. Beekhuis (1993)
ded
“The defendants contend that the Delaware nonclaim statute, 12 Del.C. § 2102, applies in this case. Section 2102 provides, in pertinent part: All claims against a decedent’s estate which arose before the death of the decedent .”
— 12 Del. C. § 2102(e)(2) — 1 case
Anthium, LLC v. Shelton (2019)
delsuperct
“Harris’s Motion for Summary Judgment A. The Complaint Is Not Time-Barred Harris argues that he is entitled to summary judgment because the Complaint is time-barred pursuant to 12 Del.”
— 12 Del. C. § 2102(f) — 2 cases
Harden v. Allstate Insurance (1995)
ded
“12 Del.C. § 2102(f). There is no dispute that the Estate had liability insurance and said policy was paid in full to plaintiffs.”
Hart v. Parker (2020)
del
“4 At the motion to dismiss phase, we accept all of plaintiff’s well- pled facts as true and draw all reasonable inferences in plaintiff’s favor. 5 The motion should be granted only if “the plaintiff would not be entitled to recover under any reasonably conceivable set of…”
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.