I am wondering if the executor of a will can sign over the executorship to someone else. A search on yahoo yeilded that an executor can decline and it would pass onto an alternate or if there is not one the court will appoint one, but nothing explict about giving it to a specific person. A search on forums did not contain the specific information either. Although it did contain alot of Star Wars questions oddly. But at any rate, is this possible or is this something I need to hire a lawyer for? Thank you much for any replys.
Depends, obviously, on the local law in the place where the estate is being administered, and I don’t know what the position in Minnesota is.
But I think that, in most places, the usual rule is that an executor who is unwilling to act cannot appoint an alternate. The will can appoint an alternate (“I appoint John as my executor or, failing him, Jane”). If the named executor declines and the will makes no alternate appointment, then the will operates as if it had named no executor. This means that the person entitled to a grant of probate will be determined by the applicable succession law, and usually this will be the deceased’s next-of-kin - the same person who could take ouit a grant of probate if the deceased had died leaving no will.
The appointment of an executor by the testator is a choice made by the testator who decided that that person is the one to be trusted to properly fulfill his wishes. It is a personal choice and cannot be delegated. The executor does not have to accept, and, in that case, the court will appoint some one else, but that has to be done by the court.
An analogy can be made regarding a lessee. A lessee cannot assign the lease or sublease the property without approval of the lessor, as the lessor trusted the lessee and did not necessarily trust anyone else.
The failure to name an executor or the failure of the executor to act as such does not invitiate an otherwise properly executed will. The property will not go intestate but will go according to the wishes of the testator, even if a testator has to be appointed by the court.
If the court appoints one, is it another family member (ie Father/Mother) or some kind of governmental/city type of professional? Who pays for this?
The legatees or devisees/heirs can agree to some other party, and if this is agreeable to the court, the court will appoint him/her/it. Otherwise the court will probably appoint a person or corporation well versed in administering estates. This entity will be paid out of the estate. I am not an expert in the administration of estates and this should not be taken at face value. Perhaps a lawyer with more expertise will chime in.
I agree and, if I was less than clear, I apologise.
The will is perfectly valid, so far as it goes, and the estate must be distributed according to the will. But, where the will is silent about the apppointment of an executor, or where the named executor declines, in the jurisdictions with which I am familiar the administrator is chosen in exactly the same way as would have applied had there been no will at all - the court doesn’t “select” an adminstrator any more than it “selects” an administrator in cases of intestacy. The legislation on the administration of estates lays down who is entitled to be appointed.
Of course, the position may differ in your jurisdiction, or in Burrido’s
Minnesota’s laws regarding this are discussed here.
…even if an executor has to be appointed by the court.
Actually, I seem to recall that the most correct word in those circumstances is “administrator”, but I’m not about to try to find a cite for that. 
We may be running into a difference between U.S. law and commonwealth law here. The three of us from commonwealth jurisdictions seem to agree on a different approach than barbitu8 suggests is the case in the U.S.
My answer would be the same as UDS gave: in the absence of an executor, the priority of next-of-kin to apply for letters of administration (the term dmartin suggests) is set out out in the statute.
Barbitu8’s own link, however, suggests that, in Minnesota at any rate, the persons entilted to a grant in default of the nominated executor are indeed set out by statute.
The correct terminology, IIRC, is “administrator with will annexed.” And, yes, statutes provide for such administrator in such cases. I stand corrected.
Much appreciated everyone.