Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 2107
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 2107.75 (2026)

Administration costs of purported last will or codicil

✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Effective:
January 13, 2012
Latest Legislation:
Senate Bill 124 - 129th General Assembly
PDF:
Download Authenticated PDF
 

When the jury or the court finds that the writing produced is not the will or codicil of the testator, the trial court shall allow as part of the costs of administration the amounts to the fiduciary and to the attorneys defending the purported will or purported codicil that the trial court finds to be reasonable compensation for the services rendered in the will contest action. The court shall order the amounts allowed to be paid out of the estate of the decedent.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1987–2013 · leading case: In re Est. of Zonas, 536 N.E.2d 642 (Ohio 1989).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In re Est. of Zonas, 536 N.E.2d 642 (Ohio 1989). · cites it 8× “The sole issue before this court is whether an attorney who is employed by beneficiaries of a contested will which is later found to be invalid can recover attorney fees from the estate pursuant to R.C. 2107.75. Prior to 1945 Ohio courts set forth when attorney fees in a will…”
In re Est. of Dawson, 689 N.E.2d 1008 (Ohio Ct. App. 2d Dist. 1996). · cites it 11× “Second, they argue that R.C. 2107.75 does not provide a basis for the payment of attorney fees from estate assets under the facts of this case.”
United Assn. of Journeymen & Apprentices of the Plumbing & Pipe Fitting Indus. v. Jack's Heating, Air Conditioning & Plumbing, Inc., 2013-Ohio-144. · cites it 2× “2005-L-042, 2006-Ohio- 1449, ¶ 29 (requiring defender of will in will contest to prove reasonableness of its fee request when seeking attorney fees under R.C. 2107.75). We apply the persuasive guidance of these cases here and find that R.”
Trubulas v. Doland, 528 N.E.2d 1313 (Ohio Ct. App. 1st Dist. 1987). · cites it 3× “A Both the Anninos group and the Cissell group claim attorney fees pur *67 suant to R.C. 2107.75. That statute reads as follows: “When the jury or court finds that the writing produced is not the last will and testament or codicil of the testator, the trial court shall allow as…”
In re Est. of Szczotka, 849 N.E.2d 302 (Ohio Ct. App. 11th Dist. 2006). · cites it 9× “The probate court premised this last decision on two conclusions: (1) that there was no showing that the defense of the will contest benefited the entire estate, as required by R.C. 2107.75 which was interpreted by In re Estate of Zonas (1989), 42 Ohio St.”
Maxey v. Mason, 5 Ohio App. Unrep. 68 (Ohio Ct. App. 4th Dist. 1990). “In fact, the only express mention of a jury trial in the new statutes is in R.C. 2107.75, which provides, in pertinent part, that: "When the jury or the court finds that the writing produced is not the last will and testament or codicil of the testator***.”
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.