Upon the petition of any interested person, the court may, with such notice as it may
prescribe, order an estate reopened if other property be discovered, if any necessary act
remains unperformed, or for any other proper cause appearing to the court. It may reappoint
the personal representative, or appoint another personal representative, to administer
any additional property or to perform other such acts as may be deemed necessary.
The provisions of law as to original administration shall apply, insofar as applicable, to
accomplish the purpose for which the estate is reopened, but a claim which is already barred
can, in no event, be asserted in the reopened administration.
[S13, §3305; C24, 27, 31, 35, 39, §11892; C46, 50, 54, 58, 62, §633.48; C66, 71, 73, 75, 77,
79, 81, §633.489]
\n
633.490 through 633.494 Reserved.\n\n SUBCHAPTER VIII
FOREIGN WILLS AND ANCILLARY ADMINISTRATION\n\n PART 1
FOREIGN WILLS
\n
Notes of Decisions
In the Matter of the Est. of Ralph Roethler, Kent Lewis & Becky Lewis v. Angela M. Kuehn, Cheryl L. Upton, Jacquelyn F. Betsworth, Daniel W. Roethler, Mary Anne James, James F. Roethler, Donald A. Roethler, Constance L. Duke, Gerald E. Roethler, Kathleen S. Good, John M. Roethler, Daniel Lee Homan, & Frank E. Homan, 801 N.W.2d 833 (Iowa 2011).
· cites it 53× “Iowa Code § 633.489 . This provision permits any interested party to reopen the estate if the party can show (1) new property, (2) a “necessary act” remains, or (3) “any other proper cause” exists.”
In Re Est. of Warrington, 686 N.W.2d 198 (Iowa 2004).
· cites it 8× “In addition, Iowa Code section 633.489, which provides for the reopening of an estate under certain conditions, states that “a claim which is already barred can, in no event, be asserted in the reopened administration.”
Matter of Est. of Witzke, 359 N.W.2d 183 (Iowa 1984).
· cites it 20× “See *185 Iowa Code § 633.489 Bar Committee Comment.”
Troester v. Sisters of Mercy Health Corp., 328 N.W.2d 308 (Iowa 1982).
· cites it 6× “She contended that decedent’s estate had been reopened and that she had been reappointed as administrator pursuant to Iowa Code section 633.489 (1981). She attached to the resistance a copy of the court order from the probate proceedings.”
Lynch v. Merchants Nat'l Bank of Cedar Rapids, 491 N.W.2d 157 (Iowa 1992).
· cites it 14× “Furthermore, the court found he had not established proper causé to reopen the estate under Iowa Code section 633.489. The present appeal followed.”
Matter of Est. of Herron, 561 N.W.2d 30 (Iowa 1997).
· cites it 6× “Resolution The petition to reopen was filed pursuant to Iowa Code section 633.489 (1995). That section states: Upon the petition of any interested person, the court may, with such notice as it may prescribe, order an estate reopened if other property be discovered, if any…”
Matter of Est. of Troester, 331 N.W.2d 123 (Iowa 1983).
· cites it 2× “Then Bernice successfully applied to the probate court to reopen the estate pursuant to Iowa Code section 633.489 (1981) and was reappointed as administrator.”
Wykoff v. Witzke, 359 N.W.2d 183 (Iowa 1984).
· cites it 14× “It then proceeded to consider whether the petition could be granted pursuant to section 633.489, the first sentence of which reads, “Upon the petition of any interested person, the court may, with such notice as it may prescribe, order an estate reopened if other property be…”
Moser v. Brown, 249 N.W.2d 612 (Iowa 1977).
“As pointed out in division I of this opinion Moser’s failure to file a copy of proof of service upon Rita Farmer in the Brown estate was not jurisdictional.”
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.