Meyer v. Milliken
Facts
Plaintiff asserted a claim of about $42,000 plus interest against Meyer's estate based on a Wyoming district court judgment. Plaintiff filed an exemplified copy of that Wyoming judgment in the probate proceeding. Meyer's estate inventory did not include Meyer's profit interest in certain oil operations known as the Moffat Pool, although that interest produced more than $10,000 during 1935 through 1939. Defendant had previously sued to set aside the Wyoming judgment, but the United States Supreme Court ultimately sustained that judgment.
Issue
Whether plaintiff properly exhibited a probate claim founded on a foreign judgment by filing an exemplified copy of the judgment itself, whether the validity of that judgment could still be contested, and whether a claim filed after the ordinary one-year period could be satisfied from estate assets that were not inventoried.
Rule
Under the statute governing claims founded on a writing, a claim founded on a judgment is properly exhibited by filing the instrument itself or an exemplification of the record on which the claim is founded, and an exemplified copy of the judgment satisfies that requirement. Defects that might appear from further inquiry are matters of defense, because jurisdiction and similar predicates are presumed prima facie. A demand filed after one year may nevertheless be paid pro rata from estate assets not inventoried or accounted for, and creditors are entitled to rely on the inventory rather than search for hidden assets or infer them from other filings.
See the holding & full analysis
Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.
- The court's holding and reasoning
- Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
- 10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case
Test yourself
If the personal representative argues the claim was not properly exhibited because Nora failed to file the entire judgment roll, how should the court rule?