花都影视

In re: Guardianship of Baker, Fairfield App. No. 07CA00065, 2008-Ohio-5079. Ward challenged the jurisdiction of the probate court to appoint a private attorney as guardian of the estate and person. Ward alleged that the appointment of a guardian was void as a result of the probate court's failure to serve notice of the guardianship hearing upon two next of kin. The trial court ruled that one person was not next of kin and the other's whereabouts were unknown therefore not entitling them to notice pursuant to Revised Code Section 2111.04 (A)(2)(b). The court of appeals noted that all those who were entitled to be served notice are those members of the class entitled to inherit as defined by the statute of descent and distribution at the time of application who also live in Ohio. Since at the time of the application, the ward's two daughters who would qualify as next-of-kin under the statute of descent and distribution did not reside in Ohio, they were not entitled to notice and the order appointing the guardian was not vacated.