ESTATES AND PROTECTED INDIVIDUALS CODE
Act 386 of 1998
700.3203 Priority among persons seeking appointment as a general personal representative.
Sec. 3203.
(1) For either formal or informal proceedings, subject to subsection (2), persons who are not disqualified have priority for appointment as a general personal representative in the following order:
(a) The person with priority as determined by a probated will including a person nominated by a power conferred in a will.
(b) The decedent's surviving spouse if the spouse is a devisee of the decedent.
(c) Other devisees of the decedent.
(d) The decedent's surviving spouse.
(e) Other heirs of the decedent.
(f) After 42 days after the decedent's death, the nominee of a creditor if the court finds the nominee suitable.
(g) After 63 days after the decedent's death, or if the court determines exigent circumstances exist, the state or county public administrator if any of the following apply:
(i) No interested person applied or petitioned for appointment of a personal representative within 63 days or the number of days determined by the court under this subdivision after the decedent's death.
(ii) The decedent died apparently leaving no known heirs.
(iii) There is no spouse, heir, or beneficiary under a will who is a United States resident and is entitled to a distributive share in the decedent's estate.
(2) An objection to the appointment of a personal representative may be made only in a formal proceeding. If an objection is made, the priorities prescribed by subsection (1) apply except in either of the following circumstances:
(a) If the estate appears to be more than adequate to meet exemptions and costs of administration but inadequate to discharge anticipated unsecured claims, on petition of creditors, the court may appoint any qualified person.
(b) If a devisee or heir who appears to have a substantial interest in the estate objects to the appointment of a person whose priority is not determined by will, the court may appoint a person who is acceptable to the devisees and heirs whose interests in the estate appear to be worth in total more than 1/2 of the probable distributable value or, if no person is acceptable to these devisees and heirs, any suitable person.
(3) A person entitled to letters under subsection (1)(b) to (e) may nominate a qualified person to act as personal representative. A person may renounce his or her right to nominate or to an appointment by filing an appropriate writing with the court. If 2 or more persons share a priority, those of them who do not renounce shall concur in nominating another to act for them or in applying for appointment.
History: 1998, Act 386, Eff. Apr. 1, 2000 ;-- Am. 2018, Act 13, Eff. May 7, 2018 ;-- Am. 2020, Act 59, Imd. Eff. Mar. 10, 2020
PopularName Notes:
EPIC
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
11
cases (
3 in the last 5 years), 2010–2025 · leading case:
In re Est. of Stan, 839 N.W.2d 498 (Mich. Ct. App. 2013).
In re Est. of Stan, 839 N.W.2d 498 (Mich. Ct. App. 2013).
· cites it 5× “4 It would be a futile act, indeed, for the probate court to appoint an individual who has already been acting without authority, merely because he or she has priority for appointment under MCL 700.3203(1), only to immediately thereafter remove that same individual for…”
Tkachik v. Mandeville, 790 N.W.2d 260 (Mich. 2010).
· cites it 2× “MCL 700.3203 governs priority among persons seeking appointment as a personal representative.”
In Re MacHuta Est. (Mich. Ct. App. 2022).
· cites it 8× “MCL 700.3203(1) provides: For either formal or informal proceedings, subject to subsection (2), persons who are not disqualified have priority for appointment as a general personal representative in the following order: 1 Even if appellant’s domicile was relevant, appellee’s…”
in Re Douglas W Baltrip Est. (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 7× “tion for case: In re Estate of Hutton">191 Mich App 292, 294 ; 477 NW2d 144 (1991) (considering an objection to the appointment of a personal representative under a similar provision of Michigan’s former probate code), citing In re Abramovitz’ Estate, 278 Mich 271, 274 ; 270 NW…”
in Re Kapp Est. (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 7× “MCL 700.3203 provides for the priority of persons seeking appointment as the decedent’s personal representative.”
In Re Johnson Est. (Mich. Ct. App. 2023).
· cites it 5× “MCL 700.3203 governs the priority of persons seeking appointment as personal representative.”
in Re Basso Est. (Mich. Ct. App. 2019).
· cites it 2× “MCL 700.3203(1) provides for the priority of persons seeking appointment as the decedent’s personal representative.”
in Re Von Greiff Est. (Mich. Ct. App. 2020).
“3203], a surviving spouse does not include any of the following: (a) An individual who obtains or consents to a final decree or judgment of divorce from the decedent or an annulment of their marriage, which decree or judgment is not recognized as valid in this state, unless they…”
Andrea Ells v. Est. of Donald J Ells (Mich. Ct. App. 2025).
“] and of [MCL 700.3203], a surviving spouse does not include any of the following: *** (e) An individual who did any of the following for 1 year or more before the death of the deceased person: (i) Was willfully absent from the decedent spouse.”
in Re Patulski Est. (Mich. Ct. App. 2014).
“MCL 700.3203(1)(a) (“a person nominated by a power conferred in a will” has first priority for appointment as personal representative).”
in Re Warner Est. (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).
“MCL 700.3203. However, an interested person may petition for replacement of a personal representative under several circumstances: -2- (a) Removal is in the best interests of the estate.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 700.3203(1) — 5 cases
In re Est. of Stan, 839 N.W.2d 498 (Mich. Ct. App. 2013).
“4 It would be a futile act, indeed, for the probate court to appoint an individual who has already been acting without authority, merely because he or she has priority for appointment under MCL 700.3203(1), only to immediately thereafter remove that same individual for…”
in Re Kapp Est. (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
“MCL 700.3203 provides for the priority of persons seeking appointment as the decedent’s personal representative.”
in Re Basso Est. (Mich. Ct. App. 2019).
“MCL 700.3203(1) provides for the priority of persons seeking appointment as the decedent’s personal representative.”
In Re MacHuta Est. (Mich. Ct. App. 2022).
“MCL 700.3203(1) provides: For either formal or informal proceedings, subject to subsection (2), persons who are not disqualified have priority for appointment as a general personal representative in the following order: 1 Even if appellant’s domicile was relevant, appellee’s…”
In Re Johnson Est. (Mich. Ct. App. 2023).
“MCL 700.3203 governs the priority of persons seeking appointment as personal representative.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 700.3203(1)(a) — 2 cases
in Re Kapp Est. (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
“MCL 700.3203 provides for the priority of persons seeking appointment as the decedent’s personal representative.”
in Re Patulski Est. (Mich. Ct. App. 2014).
“MCL 700.3203(1)(a) (“a person nominated by a power conferred in a will” has first priority for appointment as personal representative).”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 700.3203(1)(e) — 1 case
In Re MacHuta Est. (Mich. Ct. App. 2022).
“MCL 700.3203(1) provides: For either formal or informal proceedings, subject to subsection (2), persons who are not disqualified have priority for appointment as a general personal representative in the following order: 1 Even if appellant’s domicile was relevant, appellee’s…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 700.3203(2) — 6 cases
In re Est. of Stan, 839 N.W.2d 498 (Mich. Ct. App. 2013).
“4 It would be a futile act, indeed, for the probate court to appoint an individual who has already been acting without authority, merely because he or she has priority for appointment under MCL 700.3203(1), only to immediately thereafter remove that same individual for…”
in Re Douglas W Baltrip Est. (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
“tion for case: In re Estate of Hutton">191 Mich App 292, 294 ; 477 NW2d 144 (1991) (considering an objection to the appointment of a personal representative under a similar provision of Michigan’s former probate code), citing In re Abramovitz’ Estate, 278 Mich 271, 274 ; 270 NW…”
In Re Johnson Est. (Mich. Ct. App. 2023).
“MCL 700.3203 governs the priority of persons seeking appointment as personal representative.”
in Re Kapp Est. (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
“MCL 700.3203 provides for the priority of persons seeking appointment as the decedent’s personal representative.”
in Re Basso Est. (Mich. Ct. App. 2019).
“MCL 700.3203(1) provides for the priority of persons seeking appointment as the decedent’s personal representative.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 700.3203(2)(a) — 1 case
in Re Kapp Est. (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
“MCL 700.3203 provides for the priority of persons seeking appointment as the decedent’s personal representative.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 700.3203(2)(b) — 1 case
in Re Kapp Est. (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
“MCL 700.3203 provides for the priority of persons seeking appointment as the decedent’s personal representative.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 700.3203(3) — 1 case
In Re MacHuta Est. (Mich. Ct. App. 2022).
“MCL 700.3203(1) provides: For either formal or informal proceedings, subject to subsection (2), persons who are not disqualified have priority for appointment as a general personal representative in the following order: 1 Even if appellant’s domicile was relevant, appellee’s…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 700.3203(l)(a) — 1 case
In re Est. of Stan, 839 N.W.2d 498 (Mich. Ct. App. 2013).
“4 It would be a futile act, indeed, for the probate court to appoint an individual who has already been acting without authority, merely because he or she has priority for appointment under MCL 700.3203(1), only to immediately thereafter remove that same individual for…”
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.