Mo. Rev. Stat. § 473.360

Limitations on filing of claims

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MO-REVrevisor.mo.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

  473.360.  Limitations on filing of claims — when claims barred. — 1.  Except as provided in section 473.370, all claims against the estate of a deceased person, other than costs and expenses of administration, exempt property, family allowance, homestead allowance, claims of the United States and claims of any taxing authority within the United States, whether due or to become due, absolute or contingent, liquidated or unliquidated, founded on contract or otherwise, which are not filed in the probate division of the circuit court within six months after the date of the first published notice of letters testamentary or of administration or, if notice was actually mailed to, or served upon, such creditor, within two months after the date such notice was mailed, or served, whichever later occurs, or which are not paid by the personal representative, within six months after the first published notice of letters testamentary or of administration, are forever barred against the estate, the personal representative, the heirs, devisees and legatees of the decedent.  No contingent claim based on any warranty made in connection with the conveyance of real estate is barred under this section.  This six-month period does not extend any other applicable limitation periods.

  2.  Unless written notice of actions instituted or revived under section 473.363 or 473.367 is filed in the probate division within six months after the first published notice of letters, no recovery may be had in any such action on any judgment therein against the personal representative out of any assets being administered upon in the probate division or from any distributee or other person receiving the assets.  Timely filing of the claim against the estate, under this section, within six months after the first published notice of letters, whether said claim is filed before or after the institution or revival of an action against the personal representative or the estate shall satisfy the requirement of written notice herein imposed.

  3.  Nothing in this section affects or prevents any action or proceeding to enforce any mortgage, pledge or other lien upon property of the estate; except that attachment, judgment, and execution liens shall be enforced as provided in this chapter and not otherwise.

­­--------

(L. 1955 p. 385 § 139, A.L. 1957 p. 829, A.L. 1959 S.B. 305, A.L. 1969 p. 551, A.L. 1978 H.B. 1634, A.L. 1980 S.B. 637, A.L. 1989 H.B. 145, A.L. 1993 S.B. 88, A.L. 1996 S.B. 494)

Effective 5-23-96

CROSS REFERENCES:

Limitations extended by death, survival, RSMo 516.240  516.250

Survival of causes of action, RSMo 431.130, 537.010, 537.020, 537.030

(1960) Where suit on personal injuries claim was filed within the nine months but notice thereof was not filed in the probate court within that time the suit would be dismissed because barred by the nonclaim statute.  The 1959 amendment with respect to making the bar applicable only to assets of the estate discussed.  Smith v. Maynard (Mo.), 339 S.W.2d 737.

(1962) Actions against administrator of estate for personal injuries were barred where actions had been barred under nonclaim statute prior to statute's amendment since amendment did not extend new privileges granted therein to bringing of new actions which had been extinguished prior to effective date of amendment. State ex rel. Whitaker v. hall (Mo.), 358 S.W.2d 845, Potts v. Vadnais (Mo.), S.W.2d 543.

(1967) This section is mandatory and its purpose is to terminate all claims, whether due, not due, or contingent. In re Estate of Bierman (A.), 410 S.W.2d 342.

(1985) Held, due process does not require any more than publication notice to a creditor that a decedent's estate is being administered and the notice provisions of sections 473.360 and 473.033, RSMo, are constitutional. Estate of Busch v. Ferrell Duncan Clinic (Mo. banc) 700 S.W.2d 87.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 102 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1957–2022 · leading case: Missouri Highway & Transportation Commission v. Myers
Missouri Highway & Transportation Commission v. Myers (1990) mo · cites it 48× “The Commission had filed its petition as an alleged creditor of the estate, and among its contentions challenges the constitutionality of Missouri's probate nonclaim statute, § 473.360, RSMo 1978 [1] , bringing the cause within the ambit of our original appellate jurisdiction.”
Estate of Austin v. Snead (2013) mo · cites it 26× “Because of the failure to notify the children, their claims 1 against the estate were filed beyond the statutory six-month requirement found in section 473.360. 2 The children’s father, their sole custodian and guardian, filed claims against the estate, which were dismissed.”
Clarke v. Organ (1959) mo · cites it 51× “16, 1957, defendant filed a motion to dismiss the petition for failure to comply with the provisions of the Probate Code (sections 473.360, 473.363 and 473.367, Mo.”
North v. Hawkinson (1959) mo · cites it 39× “Defendant's motion to dismiss plaintiff's petition was sustained on the stated grounds plaintiff failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted; laches; and, if a claim be stated, it was barred by sections 473.360 and 473.367 of the new Probate Code (Laws 1955, pp.”
Tulsa Professional Collection Services, Inc. v. Pope (1988) scotus · cites it 4× “…probate proceedings commenced; five years if not); Idaho Code § 15-3-803 (a)(1)(2) (1979) (four months; three years); Mo. Rev. Stat. §§ 473.360 (1), (3) (1986) (six months; three years). Most States also provide that creditors are to be notified of the requirement to file…”
Hatfield v. McCluney (1995) mo · cites it 13× “370 provides, with certain exceptions, that “any judgment or decree is deemed filed within the meaning of § 473.360 as of the time a copy of the judgment or decree is filed in the probate division as required by this section.”
Weems v. Montgomery (2004) moctapp · cites it 7× “They contend only that any failure on their part to comply with Missouri’s non-claim statute, section 473.360, merely bars them from recovering against the estate on any judgment that they may obtain, but does not bar them from bringing this action or obtaining judgment.”
Hartog v. Siegler (1981) moctapp · cites it 10× “Appellants’ next claim of error is that the trial court erred in reimbursing the respondents for expenditures made prior to Mrs.”
State Ex Rel. Department of Social Services v. Bowling (1988) mo · cites it 10× “That question is: Does the nonclaim statute, § 473.360, bar a claim of the State of Missouri under § 473.”
Darrah v. Foster (1962) mo · cites it 11× “reason of the repeal of § 473.360, RSMo 1957 Cum.Supp., V.A.M.S., and the enactment of another section bearing the same number, RSMo 1959, V.”
Estate of Busch v. Ferrell-Duncan Clinic, Inc. (1985) mo · cites it 8× “Appeal by a creditor from the denial of its claim against a decedent’s estate because it was barred by the nonclaim statute, § 473.360, RSMo 1978. The issue raised is whether a creditor may constitutionally be barred when the only notice given of the appointment of a personal…”
State Ex Rel. Whitaker v. Hall (1962) mo · cites it 17× “against relator has ever complied with the provisions of the non-claim statutes, §§ 473.360, 473.363, 473.367 and 473.370, RSMo 1959, V.”
— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 473.360(1) — 1 case
Hartog v. Siegler (1981) moctapp “Appellants’ next claim of error is that the trial court erred in reimbursing the respondents for expenditures made prior to Mrs.”
— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 473.360(2) — 4 cases
Potts v. Vadnais (1962) mo
Smith v. Maynard (1960) mo
— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 473.360(3) — 1 case
— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 473.360(4) — 1 case
Hartog v. Siegler (1981) moctapp “Appellants’ next claim of error is that the trial court erred in reimbursing the respondents for expenditures made prior to Mrs.”
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.