Serving as a personal representative carries real authority over someone else’s property. A March 2026 decision from the Montana Supreme Court confirms how quickly a district court can limit that authority when someone with an apparent interest in the estate objects. The ruling matters whether you are administering an estate or watching one be administered.
What Happened in In re Estate of Sean Thomas
Sean Thomas died in 2022. His will named his widow as sole heir and personal representative, and she opened an informal probate in Butte-Silver Bow County.
Nearly a year later, the decedent’s father sued over ownership of a family apparel business and asserted substantial creditor claims against the estate. He then asked the probate court to stop her from spending estate funds, alleging she had paid out hundreds of thousands of dollars for personal expenses and for her own defense in that suit.
The district court required prior approval for any distribution and declined to impose a bond. The Supreme Court affirmed on every issue presented.
The dispute is not over. The underlying business lawsuit reached a jury verdict in June 2025 that is now itself on appeal, and the Court expressly declined to decide whether the father qualifies as an estate creditor, leaving that question for another day.
Informal Probate Is Not Unsupervised Probate
Most Montana estates move through informal probate. The clerk handles the opening paperwork, and the personal representative administers the estate without asking a judge for permission at each step.
That does not mean the court has no role. Under § 72-3-617, MCA, a court may restrain a personal representative on the petition of anyone who appears to have an interest in the estate. That authority applies whether administration is informal or formal, and no one has to petition for formal probate first.
A court acting under that provision may:
- Bar specified acts of administration
- Halt disbursements or distributions
- Suspend particular powers or duties
- Order other steps securing proper performance
The Label on the Order Did Not Control
The order was titled a preliminary injunction. The Supreme Court looked past that label to its substance.
Because the restraint rested on the probate code rather than the general injunction statutes, the familiar preliminary injunction standard did not apply. Neither did the bond requirement that accompanies injunctions in civil actions. And the showing a petitioner must make is modest. Proof of a valid creditor claim or actual mismanagement is not required.
What This Means for Fiduciaries and Beneficiaries
A personal representative holds estate property in trust for creditors and others interested in the estate. Paying personal legal fees from estate accounts invites the challenge that arose here.
Beneficiaries and creditors have a faster route to relief than many assume. Guidance from a Montana probate litigation attorney can clarify whether court intervention makes sense.
Planning Reduces the Odds of a Fight
Careful drafting will not prevent every dispute. But it narrows them. Naming a successor who is not entangled in family business disagreements, clarifying which ownership interests belong to the estate, and addressing likely creditor claims during your lifetime all reduce friction later. A Montana estate planning attorney can also structure business ownership so a death does not set off a fight over who owned what.
Speak With a Butte Estate Planning Attorney
Silverman Law Office, PLLC advises fiduciaries, beneficiaries, and business owners throughout Montana on estate administration and the disputes that follow. Reach out to our office to discuss your circumstances.
