The Default Rule: Everyone Must Agree
Appointing co-representatives can seem like a fair way to share responsibility, especially when multiple children are involved. But the legal reality is more demanding than most families expect. Unless the will says otherwise, every act connected with the estate requires the concurrence of all co-representatives.
If two or more persons are appointed co-representatives and unless the will provides otherwise, the concurrence of all is required on all acts connected with the administration and distribution of the estate.
A.R.S. § 14-3717That means selling property, paying creditors, distributing assets, and filing documents all require agreement. If one co-representative disagrees or is simply unavailable, the process can stall.
Three Situations Where One Can Act Alone
Arizona recognizes that requiring unanimous action at all times would be impractical. The statute carves out three exceptions. First, any co-representative can receive and receipt for property due the estate without the others. Second, when time-sensitive emergency action is needed to preserve estate assets and the other co-representatives cannot be reached in time, one may act alone. Third, a co-representative who has been delegated authority by the others can act independently within that delegation.
People dealing with one co-representative also receive protection. If a third party does not know another co-representative exists, or if the co-representative they are dealing with states that they have authority to act alone for one of the reasons listed above, that third party is fully protected, just as if the co-representative had been the sole personal representative.
For families considering this arrangement, it is worth discussing with experienced estate planning counsel whether co-representatives truly make sense or whether naming a single personal representative with an alternate would be simpler.