recognizing that state probate court had ongoing jurisdiction and that the law of Ohio vested exclusive jurisdiction of probate matters to the probate court
Summary of this case from Uzielli v. FrankNos. 92-5796, 92-5797, 92-5862.
Decided and Filed: December 20, 1993.
W.D.Ky., 813 F.Supp. 541.
VACATED.
recognizing that state probate court had ongoing jurisdiction and that the law of Ohio vested exclusive jurisdiction of probate matters to the probate court
Summary of this case from Uzielli v. FrankFull title:CALLAHAN v. HUTSELL, CALLAHAN BUCHINO P.S.C. Revised Profit Sharing Plan
Court:United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit
Date published: Dec 20, 1993
obate courts and claims for theft and undue influence are inextricably connected both to probate and to…
Taylor v. Shiley Inc.The trial court summarized its decision as follows: By virtue of the order of the United States District…