How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Thomas McJD Your Own Question
Thomas McJD
Thomas McJD, Attorney
Category: Estate Law
Satisfied Customers: 6516
Experience:  Wills, Trusts, Probate & other Estate Matters
Type Your Estate Law Question Here...
Thomas McJD is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

Oklahoma Law if no will is in place and there are 3 children

This answer was rated:

Oklahoma Law if no will is in place and there are 3 children as beneficiaries who becomes the executor according to the law?
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
Relist: No answer yet.
No answer yet
Hi, I will be happy to assist you, and it is my goal to make you a very satisfied customer! This may take a few minutes, so thanks for your patience.

I assume that there is no surviving spouse. In that case, the children are all equally entitled to serve as administrator of the estate. They would all be appointed if none are willing to step down, in which case a "majority controls" rule would allow 2 of 3 to make the decisions. Any one of them could refuse to serve, in which case the remaining child or children would be able to serve as administrator.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.
So... If majority rules then does it matter that 2 of 3 say what the original agreement was? And can a judge make the 3rd stick to the original agreement?

An agreement between the beneficiaries is a separate matter. They would all need to agree. The administrator or administrators otherwise have a legal duty to distribute the estate equally according to Oklahoma law. Only if all 3 agree on a different distribution would the administrators have a duty to seek permission from the court to divide the property in a manner consistent with the agreement and contrary to Oklahoma law.

I reviewed your prior question in regard to your current situation. Unfortunately, for a contract to be valid when it involves real property, it must be in writing. However, even despite having a valid contract, you expended funds for the benefit of the estate and are entitled to reimbursement for the value added to the property. Thus, you could seek to be reimbursed from the estate prior to distribution of estate property. That would mean that you perhaps would be the only distributee of property (depending on the value) or that you receive a larger share. This would give you leverage to work things out.

In any case, you would best be served by retaining a local attorney that could ensure your rights are fully protected. Since probate will be necessary, the court will be involved, and given the complexity of your situation you should not attempt any remedy without an estate attorney in Oklahoma.

Customer: replied 4 years ago.
Great answer! I will rate it that way as well. There was an agreement by all 3 but 1 has denied it ever existed. I have stmts for 4 different people who were witness to the agreement between us. Does that matter or mean anything in a court of law?

Ps I will be retaining counsel I just need to clarify a few things first
It could help a great deal, yes. And you may be able to argue the contract was not for purchase of real estate but for distribution of assets of an estate, in which case the statute of frauds (requiring the agreement in writing) does not apply. Thus, you may be able to convince the court of a verbal agreement that can be enforced in any event -- just another reason to have a local attorney assist you.
Thomas McJD and 2 other Estate Law Specialists are ready to help you