Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 2117.17 (2026)

Hearing allowing and classifying claims

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(A) The probate court on its own motion may, and on motion of the executor or administrator shall, assign all claims against the estate that have been presented and any other known valid debts of the estate for hearing on a day certain. Upon the assignment, and in no case less than ten days before the date fixed for hearing or a longer period that the court may order, the executor or administrator shall cause written notice of the hearing to be served upon the following persons who have not waived the notice in writing or otherwise voluntarily entered their appearance:

(1) If it appears that the estate is fully solvent, the notice shall be given to the surviving spouse and all other persons having an interest in the estate as devisees, legatees, heirs, and distributees.

(2) If it appears probable that there will not be sufficient assets to pay all of the valid debts of the estate in full, then the notice also shall be given to all creditors and claimants whose claims have been rejected and whose rights have not been finally determined by judgment, reference, or lapse of time.

(B) The notice required by this section shall state that a hearing concerning the debts has been scheduled, shall set forth the time and place of the hearing, and shall state that the action of the executor or administrator in allowing and classifying claims will be confirmed at the hearing unless cause to the contrary is shown. The notice shall be served personally or by certified mail in the manner specified for service of notice of the rejection of a claim under section 2117.11 of the Revised Code. Proof of service of the notice to the satisfaction of the court, by affidavit or otherwise, and all waivers of service shall be filed in court at the time of the hearing. At any time before hearing, any interested person may file exceptions in writing to the allowance or classification of any specific claim. The court may cause or permit other interested persons to be served with notice and witnesses to be subpoenaed as may be required to present the issues fully.

(C) The court, upon the hearing, shall determine whether the executor or administrator acted properly in allowing and classifying each claim and shall make an order confirming or disapproving that action.

(D) An order of the court disapproving the allowance of a claim shall have the same effect as a rejection of the claim on the date on which the claimant is served with notice of the court's order. Notice of the court's order shall be served personally or by certified mail in the manner specified for service of notice of the rejection of a claim under section 2117.11 of the Revised Code. An order of the court confirming the allowance or classification of a claim shall constitute a final order and shall have the same effect as a judgment at law or decree in equity, and shall be final as to all persons having notice of the hearing and as to claimants subsequently presenting their claims, though without notice of the hearing. In the absence of fraud, the allowance and classification of a claim and the subsequent payment of it in good faith shall not be subject to question upon exceptions to the executor's or administrator's accounts. The confirmation of a claim by the court shall not preclude the executor or administrator from thereafter rejecting the claim on discovery of error in the executor's or administrator's previous action or on requisition as provided in sections 2117.13 and 2117.14 of the Revised Code.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1956–2021 · leading case: Pugh v. Capital One Bank USA N.A., 2021 Ohio 994 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Pugh v. Capital One Bank USA N.A., 2021 Ohio 994 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021). “R.C. 2117.17(C). The claims are paid in accordance with the priority of classes set forth in R.”
Stull v. Jentes, 493 N.E.2d 567 (Ohio Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 2× “Assignment of Error “The plaintiff-appellant, for his assignment of errors [sic], says that the judgment rendered by the Wayne County Municipal Court, journalized on May 10, 1984, is erroneous in the following respect: “1.”
In Re Est. of Koplin, 137 N.E.2d 424 (Ohio Ct. App. 1956). · cites it 6× “This schedule of debts came on for hearing according to Section 2117.17, Revised Code, upon a day certain and after exceptions to two of the allowed items therein were filed by certain of the legatees, the appellees in this action.”
Nadlin v. Mannarino, 149 N.E.2d 31 (Ohio Ct. App. 1957). · cites it 2× “23, Revised Code); and to pass upon claims against an estate (Section 2117.17, Revised Code). And, in the performance of its manifold duties, “The Probate Court shall have plenary power at law and in equity fully to dispose of any matter properly before the court, unless the…”
Blanchard v. Morgan, 460 N.E.2d 715 (Ohio Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 2× “The lower court erred at the hearing held pursuant to O.R.C. 2117.17 in ordering allowance of a claim previously rejected by the administratrix.”
In Re Est. of Bochik, 493 N.E.2d 297 (Ohio Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 9× “Appellee further requested that the court set the matter for hearing pursuant to R.C. 2117.17. Appellant, BancOhio, an unsecured creditor of the estate, received notice of the hearing, “but chose not to attend the hearing, relying on the state of the record.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2117.17(B) — 1 case
In Re Est. of Bochik, 493 N.E.2d 297 (Ohio Ct. App. 1985). “Appellee further requested that the court set the matter for hearing pursuant to R.C. 2117.17. Appellant, BancOhio, an unsecured creditor of the estate, received notice of the hearing, “but chose not to attend the hearing, relying on the state of the record.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2117.17(C) — 1 case
Pugh v. Capital One Bank USA N.A., 2021 Ohio 994 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021). “R.C. 2117.17(C). The claims are paid in accordance with the priority of classes set forth in R.”
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.