Change in Statute Governing Probate Court Jurisdiction Suggests that Tortious Interference with Expectancy of Inheritance May Be Brought In Probate Court

Ross v. Hornack, 8th Dist. App. No. 98961, 2013 Ohio 1901. Daughter filed a will contest, a complaint for concealment of assets and a complaint for tortious interference with expectancy of inheritance, after she was specifically disinherited from her mother's estate in favor of decedent's son. The tortious interference claim was dismissed because the probate court did not have statutory jurisdiction to hear the claim for tortious interference and the probate court's plenary jurisdiction did not encompass the claim. In the time between the dismissal of the tortious interference action and appellate decision, the Ohio legislature revised R.C. 2101.24, which sets forth the jurisdiction of the probate court.

On appeal, daughter argued that the new version of R.C. 2101.24 does give the probate court authority to hear the interference claim. The court held that under the version of R.C. 2101.24 enacted on March 27, 2013, the probate court may have jurisdiction to hear the interference claim, but that version of the statute had not been enacted at the time daughter's case was decided at the trial court level; therefore, the dismissal of the interference claim was proper.