Colorado § 15-12-1102 - Procedure for securing court approval of compromise.

§ 15-12-1102. Procedure for securing court approval of compromise.

(1) The procedure for securing court approval of a compromise is as follows:

(a) The terms of the compromise shall be set forth in an agreement in writing which shall be executed by all competent persons and parents acting for any minor child having beneficial interests or having claims which will or may be affected by the compromise. Execution is not required by any person whose identity cannot be ascertained or whose whereabouts is unknown and cannot reasonably be ascertained.

(b) Any interested person, including the personal representative or a trustee, then may submit the agreement to the court for its approval and for execution by the personal representative, the trustee of every affected testamentary trust, and other fiduciaries and representatives.

(c) After notice to all interested persons or their representatives, including the personal representative of the estate and all affected trustees of trusts, the court, if it finds that the contest or controversy is in good faith and that the effect of the agreement upon the interests of persons represented by fiduciaries or other representatives is just and reasonable, shall make an order approving the agreement and directing all fiduciaries under its supervision to execute the agreement. A minor child represented only by his parents may be bound only if his parents join with other competent persons in execution of the compromise, and if there is no conflict of interest between parent and child. Upon the making of the order and the execution of the agreement, all further disposition of the estate is in accordance with the terms of the agreement.

Source: L. 73: R&RE, p. 1607, § 1. C.R.S. 1963: § 153-3-1102.

ANNOTATION

Law reviews. For article, "Avoiding Litigation in Probate Estates", see 18 Colo. Law. 875 (1989).

Court may properly approve a settlement agreement even over the objection of one of the petitioner beneficiaries, provided the court's determination is fair, reasonable, and in the parties' best interests. The principle is similar to that behind a shareholder derivative suit, where the plaintiffs are acting as representatives of the corporation and the court is charged with protecting the interests of the corporation as a whole. Saunders v. Muratori, 251 P.3d 550 (Colo. App. 2010).

Applied in Cavanaugh v. State, Dept. of Rev. Inheritance & Gift Tax Div., 42 Colo. App. 453, 599 P.2d 965 (1979).

PART 12

COLLECTION OF PERSONAL PROPERTY BY AFFIDAVIT AND SUMMARY ADMINISTRATION PROCEDURE FOR SMALL ESTATES

Law reviews: For article, "Streamlining the Public Administrators' Operations: Changes Resulting from the 2017 OSA Audit", see 48 Colo. Law. 49 (May 2019).