Opinion

Tulsa Professional Collection Services, Inc. v. Pope

  • 61 O.B.A.J. 3191
  • 808 P.2d 640
  • 1990 OK 125
  • 1990 Okla. LEXIS 144
  • 1990 WL 191514
Court
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Filed
Nov 27, 1990
Status
Published
Author
Wilson
On the bench
Opala, Hargrave, Hodges, Simms, Doolin, Kauger, Wilson, Lavender, Summers
Cited by
38 cases

holding after remand that where executrix knew that hospital was providing care to decedent in his last illness, hospital was an identifiable creditor entitled to be furnished with actual notice

How later courts described this case

  • holding after remand that where executrix knew that hospital was providing care to decedent in his last illness, hospital was an identifiable creditor entitled to be furnished with actual notice
  • An estate representative must use due diligence to identify the decedent’s potential creditors from all available sources at hand. Estate representative who knows of decedent’s last-illness hospital stay is put on notice that the health care provider is likely to stand in the status of a *676 creditor of the decedent's estate.

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

ALMA WILSON, Justice,

concurring specially:

I concur specially to emphasize the significance of Part IV. Under Part IV, a personal representative in probate has a duty to mail “notice to creditors” to the hospital whenever the deceased received hospital care related to the last illness. Part IV recognizes no exception to this duty. Notice must be mailed to the hospital, even though the hospital advises that the charges will be paid by the insurer or the hospital is advised of the pending probate. Mailing of the “notice to creditors” to all identifiable health care providers for the last illness of the deceased, without regard to insurance coverage, will place the burden upon the health care provider to timely preserve its claim, whether liquidated or unliquidated. Close attention to this duty by the bar will eliminate intolerable lapses of time from the notice to the filing of claims by health care providers caused by delays in processing insurance claims. With notice mailed, the hospital will not be in a position to seek payment *649 through the probate court more than four years after publication of the notice to creditors, as in the instant case. With notice mailed, operation of the non-claim statute, 58 O.S.Supp.1990, § 331.2, will bar both the filing and the arising of the claim of the health care provider or its assignee.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.