Case Title: Hunt v. Estate of Harold Guy Hunt

Citation: 

Docket Number: 2110768

State: alabama

Court: Alabama Supreme Court

Date: 2013-03-15T00:00:00Z

Document:
REL: 03/15/2013 
Notice: 
T h i s 
o p i n i o n i s s u b j e c t t o f o r m a l 
r e v i s i o n b e f o r e 
p u b l i c a t i o n i n 
t h e advance 
s h e e t s o f 
Southern Reporter. 
R e a d e r s a r e r e q u e s t e d t o 
n o t i f y t h e 
Reporter of Decisions, 
Alabama 
A p p e l l a t e 
C o u r t s , 
300 D e x t e r Avenue, 
Montgomery, 
Alabama 
36104-3741 
((334) 
2 2 9 - 0 6 4 9 ) , o f 
any t y p o g r a p h i c a l o r o t h e r e r r o r s , i n 
o r d e r t h a t c o r r e c t i o n s may be made 
b e f o r e t h e 
o p i n i o n i s 
p r i n t e d i n 
Southern Reporter. 
ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS 
OCTOBER TERM, 2012-2013 
2110768 
Harold Keith Hunt 
v. 
Estate of Harold Guy Hunt et a l . 
Appeal from Cullman C i r c u i t Court 
(CV-10-38) 
PITTMAN, Judge. 
H a r o l d K e i t h Hunt, t h e s u r v i v i n g son 
o f 
H a r o l d Guy Hunt, 
who d i e d t e s t a t e on J a n u a r y 30, 2009, a p p e a l s from a November 
21, 2011, o r d e r o f t h e 
C u l l m a n C i r c u i t C o u r t ("the c i r c u i t 
c o u r t " ) t h a t , among o t h e r t h i n g s , r e f u s e d t o 
i s s u e him 
a deed 
2110768 
t o the r e a l p r o p e r t y d e v i s e d t o him i n h i s f a t h e r ' s w i l l 
u n t i l 
a l l d e b t s , c l a i m s , and c o s t s o f a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f t h e e s t a t e 
had been p a i d . 
The supreme c o u r t t r a n s f e r r e d t h e a p p e a l t o 
t h i s 
c o u r t , 
p u r s u a n t t o § 1 2 - 2 - 7 ( 6 ) , A l a . Code 1975. 
We 
d i s m i s s 
t h e a p p e a l as h a v i n g been t a k e n 
from a 
n o n f i n a l 
judgment. 
The a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f the e s t a t e was removed from t h e 
Cullman County P r o b a t e C o u r t t o t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t , and t h e 
c i r c u i t c o u r t t o o k j u r i s d i c t i o n over t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f t h e 
e s t a t e . 
The c i r c u i t c o u r t d e t e r m i n e d t h a t the d e b t s , 
c l a i m s , 
and 
c o s t s of t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of the e s t a t e amounted t o 
a p p r o x i m a t e l y $50,000; t h a t 
the p e r s o n a l 
p r o p e r t y 
of t h e 
e s t a t e 
was 
i n s u f f i c i e n t 
t o pay 
t h o s e 
d e b t s , 
c l a i m s , 
and 
c o s t s ; t h a t H a r o l d 
K e i t h Hunt and two o f h i s s i s t e r s , 
A n i t a 
Lynn Hunt and S h e r r i e Hunt W i l l i a m s , were s p e c i f i c d e v i s e e s o f 
r e a l p r o p e r t y under t h e terms o f t h e i r 
f a t h e r ' s 
w i l l ; and, 
f u r t h e r , 
t h a t 
"each s p e c i f i c d e v i s e e s h a l l be o b l i g a t e d t o pay the 
pro 
r a t a share t h a t he o r she i s t o r e c e i v e under 
the 
w i l l 
i n o r d e r 
t o pay t h e c l a i m s , 
d e b t s , and 
c o s t s of a d m i n i s t r a t i o n [ o f t h e e s t a t e ] . 
I f the 
d e v i s e e s 
a r e not a b l e t o pay t h e i r p r o r a t a s h a r e , 
then h i s or h e r r e s p e c t i v e 
d e v i s e may be s o l d t o 
s a t i s f y 
t h e 
d e b t s , 
c l a i m s , 
and 
c o s t s 
o f 
2 
2110768 
a d m i n i s t r a t i o n 
[ i n 
the 
amount 
of 
a p p r o x i m a t e l y 
$50,000]." 
A l t h o u g h 
the 
c i r c u i t 
c o u r t , i n i t s November 21, 
2011, 
o r d e r , 
r e s o l v e d most of the 
i s s u e s between the t e s t a t o r ' s 
s u r v i v i n g 
spouse 
and 
c h i l d r e n , 
t h e r e 
had 
been 
no 
f i n a l 
s e t t l e m e n t of the e s t a t e when the a p p e a l was 
t a k e n , and 
the 
c i r c u i t c o u r t d i d not d i r e c t the e n t r y of a f i n a l judgment as 
t o i t s o r d e r . 
See R u l e 5 4 ( b ) , A l a . R. C i v . P. 
In 
E u s t a c e 
v. Browning, 30 
So. 
3d 445, 
449 
( A l a . C i v . 
App. 
2009), t h i s c o u r t s t a t e d : 
" T h i s c o u r t has p r e v i o u s l y h e l d t h a t , when a 
c i r c u i t 
c o u r t r e t a i n s j u r i s d i c t i o n 
over the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n 
of a decedent's e s t a t e , any o r d e r e n t e r e d b e f o r e the 
f i n a l s e t t l e m e n t of the e s t a t e would be a n o n f i n a l 
judgment u n l e s s c e r t i f i e d 
as f i n a l p u r s u a n t 
t o R u l e 
5 4 ( b ) , 
A l a . R. 
C i v . 
P. 
See 
M o n t i e l v. 
E s t a t e 
of 
 
M o n t i e l , 
976 
So. 
2d 
1043, 
1044 
( A l a . C i v . 
App. 
2007). ... G e n e r a l l y , 'a n o n f i n a l judgment w i l l 
not 
s u p p o r t 
an 
a p p e a l . ' 
N a y l o r 
v. N a y l o r , 
981 
So. 
2d 
440, 
441 
( A l a . C i v . App. 
2007)." 
A c c o r d i n g l y , we d i s m i s s the a p p e a l as h a v i n g been t a k e n from 
a n o n f i n a l judgment. 
APPEAL DISMISSED. 
Moore and Donaldson, J J . , concur. 
Thompson, P.J., and Thomas, J . , r e c u s e 
t h e m s e l v e s . 
3