In an issue of first impression, the Indiana Court of Appeals has held that a will contest is a civil action and a defendant
in this type of action is required to file an answer or plead to a complaint as provided by the state’s trial rules.
Siblings Rod and Marshall Avery appealed the default judgment against them in a will contest initiated by their sister Trina
Avery. Trina served the brothers with summonses and copies of the complaint with Trial Rule 4. Neither brother appeared, answered,
or pleaded in the will contest, and Trina filed a motion for default judgment. The brothers filed a motion to dismiss, claiming
they didn’t have to file an answer. The trial court entered default judgment against them.
In Rod
L. Avery, et al. v. Trina R. Avery, No. 49A05-1004-PL-320, the appellate court had to decide whether interested parties
to a will contest are required to file an answer to the complaint. The Probate Code is silent on this issue, but the judges
looked to Robinson v. Estate of Hardin, 587 N.E.2d 683, 685 (Ind. 1992), which held that Trial Rules 4 through 4.16
are applicable to will contests as well as Trial Rule 7(A).
“Again, a will contest is separate from the administration of an estate, and the executor and ‘all other persons
beneficially interested in the will’ are made defendants in a will contest. See I.C. § 29-1-7-17,” wrote
Judge Edward Najam. “Accordingly, we hold that, as with any civil complaint, a defendant in a will contest is required
to file an answer or otherwise plead within the time provided under Trial Rule 6.”
The judges declined to hold that Indiana Code Section 29-1-1-10 applies to probate proceedings related to will contests.
That section applies to proceedings related to the administration of a decedent’s estate, wrote Judge Najam.














Jack, I was only responding to bill's comment of tying everybody in government together. I agree with you though, it takes one bad apple to ruin the bunch.. As in any profession. What's truly unfair is when somebody violates someone's trust and takes complete advantage of someone
John’s comment is unfair. The majority of attorneys can be trusted. Unfortunately, all it takes is one greedy, unscrupulous, immoral attorney to jade the public.
In regards to bill's comment about trusting the cover meant. We can trust them about as much as we can trust attorneys'.
This is disturbing to learn...
Yikes!