(A) The Rules of Civil Procedure govern all aspects of a will contest action, except as otherwise provided in sections 2107.71 to 2107.77 of the Revised Code.
(B)(1) Each party to a will contest action has the right to a jury trial of the action. To assert the right, a party shall demand a jury trial in the manner prescribed in the Rules of Civil Procedure. Subject to division (B)(2) of this section, if a party demands a jury trial in that manner, the action shall be tried to a jury.
(2) Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary in Civil Rule 38, a demand of a jury trial in a will contest action may be withdrawn, if either of the following applies:
(a) All parties to the action who are not in default of answer, consent to the withdrawal of the demand prior to the commencement of the trial;
(b) All parties to the action who are not in default of answer and who are present at the time of the commencement of the trial, consent to the withdrawal of the demand.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1983–2025 · leading case: Smith v. Klem, 450 N.E.2d 1171 (Ohio 1983).
Smith v. Klem, 450 N.E.2d 1171 (Ohio 1983). · cites it 4דOne of the major changes appears in R.C. 2107.72 which provides: “The Rules of Civil Procedure govern all aspects of ,a will contest action, except as otherwise provided in sections 2107.”
Krischbaum v. Dillon, 567 N.E.2d 1291 (Ohio 1991). “R.C. 2107.72(A) provides: “The Rules of Civil Procedure govern all aspects of a will contest action, except as otherwise provided in sections 2107.”
In re Est. of Bohl, 2016-Ohio-637. · cites it 2ד82, since the General Assembly, by enacting R.C. 2107.72, specifically applied the Rules of Civil Procedure to will contest actions, making Civ.”
In re Est. of Taylor, 2024-Ohio-1496, 243 N.E.3d 153. · cites it 3דNonetheless, the February 2023 rules were in effect well before the court overruled Michael’s exceptions to the appraisal and inventory in August 2023. -18- Ann, Drew, and Wanda.”
Weaver v. Donnerberg, 498 N.E.2d 496 (Ohio Ct. App. 3d Dist. 1985). · cites it 2דPrior to amendments occurring in 1976 it had long been held that failure to join all necessary parties within the limitation period divested the court of jurisdiction to proceed.”
Trubulas v. Doland, 528 N.E.2d 1313 (Ohio Ct. App. 1st Dist. 1987). · cites it 2דR.C. 2107.72, which had no counterpart under R.”
Naple v. Bednarik, 2012-Ohio-5881. “53 does not require that the magistrate consider proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law when neither party requests that the magistrate prepare a decision that includes findings of fact and conclusions of law.”
Black v. Watson, 2016-Ohio-1470. “See R.C. 2107.72(A). There is nothing in the Ohio Revised Code supplanting Civ.”
Maxey v. Mason, 5 Ohio App. Unrep. 68 (Ohio Ct. App. 4th Dist. 1990). · cites it 13דA brief review of the former pertinent statutes and decisional law is helpful in determining the intent of the General Assembly in enacting present R.C. 2107.72. The history of will contests has been well chronicled in the Ohio decisional law.”
Elliot v. Moeller, 2014-Ohio-4136. “No one disputes that Marcia failed to initially name all of the parties required by R.C. 2107.72. Thus, the sole question before this court is whether a motion to join additional parties relates back to the date of the filing of the original will contest for the purpose of the…”
In re Est. of Wilson, 2025-Ohio-5594. “R.C. 2107.72(A). Civil Rule 73 contains particular provisions concerning venue and service that apply “to proceedings in the probate division of the court of common pleas,” and further states that “all of the Rules of Civil Procedure, though not specifically mentioned in this…”
Ohio Rev. Code § 2107.72(A): 5 cases
Krischbaum v. Dillon, 567 N.E.2d 1291 (Ohio 1991). “R.C. 2107.72(A) provides: “The Rules of Civil Procedure govern all aspects of a will contest action, except as otherwise provided in sections 2107.”
Naple v. Bednarik, 2012-Ohio-5881. “53 does not require that the magistrate consider proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law when neither party requests that the magistrate prepare a decision that includes findings of fact and conclusions of law.”
In re Est. of Taylor, 2024-Ohio-1496, 243 N.E.3d 153. “Nonetheless, the February 2023 rules were in effect well before the court overruled Michael’s exceptions to the appraisal and inventory in August 2023. -18- Ann, Drew, and Wanda.”
Black v. Watson, 2016-Ohio-1470. “See R.C. 2107.72(A). There is nothing in the Ohio Revised Code supplanting Civ.”
In re Est. of Wilson, 2025-Ohio-5594. “R.C. 2107.72(A). Civil Rule 73 contains particular provisions concerning venue and service that apply “to proceedings in the probate division of the court of common pleas,” and further states that “all of the Rules of Civil Procedure, though not specifically mentioned in this…”
Ohio Rev. Code § 2107.72(B): 1 case
Maxey v. Mason, 5 Ohio App. Unrep. 68 (Ohio Ct. App. 4th Dist. 1990). “A brief review of the former pertinent statutes and decisional law is helpful in determining the intent of the General Assembly in enacting present R.C. 2107.72. The history of will contests has been well chronicled in the Ohio decisional law.”
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.