## Facts

- Walter Kinsley Jackson and his wife created a revocable inter vivos trust and transferred assets into it; the wife predeceased Jackson.
- Johnny C. Benjamin filed a probate petition alleging Jackson died intestate and that Benjamin was Jackson’s adult son and sole surviving heir.
- The hearing notice stated Benjamin sought letters of administration and set a hearing date, but it did not state that heirship would be determined.
- The district court issued letters of administration and entered an order finding Jackson died intestate and that Benjamin was Jackson’s son and sole heir; the record contained no evidentiary proof of Benjamin’s heirship.
- Benjamin then pursued relief within the probate proceeding against the trust’s co-trustees, seeking their removal and recovery of trust assets on the theory that Oklahoma’s pretermitted-heir statute applied to revocable trust assets.
- The district court rejected the claim, concluding the pretermitted-heir statute does not apply to revocable inter vivos trusts; the intermediate appellate court affirmed.

## Issues

1. Whether Oklahoma’s pretermitted-heir statute, 84 O.S. § 132, applies to assets held in a revocable inter vivos trust.
2. Whether, in probate, a determination of heirs is binding absent notice meeting 58 O.S. § 240.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Oklahoma granted certiorari, vacated the intermediate appellate opinion, and affirmed the district court.
- The court held 84 O.S. § 132 does not reach assets of a revocable inter vivos trust.
- The court held an order determining heirs is not binding unless notice is given as required by 58 O.S. § 240.
- The notice defect did not change the outcome on the trust-asset claim because § 132 was inapplicable to the trust regardless of heirship status.

## Legal Principles

- The pretermitted-heir statute, 84 O.S. § 132, is limited to omitted children of a testator under a will and does not extend to revocable inter vivos trusts absent legislative authorization.
- Courts apply statutory text and context and will not add omitted coverage by judicial construction merely because a trust can function as a will substitute.
- Revocable trust assets are treated as non-probate transfers for purposes of § 132’s protection.
- Due process and statutory compliance require that notice under 58 O.S. § 240 be given before a probate court’s heirship determination can bind interested persons.

## Conclusion

The Oklahoma Supreme Court refused to extend the pretermitted-heir statute to revocable trust property and required specific statutory notice before an heirship determination in probate can be binding, while leaving the trust assets outside the pretermitted-heir remedy.


In re Estate of Jackson, 194 P.3d 1269 (Okla. 2008)