Short answer. No, generally not. Rule 90, Section 2 provides that questions of advancement made or alleged to have been made by the deceased to an heir may be heard and determined by the court handling the estate proceedings, and that the court's final order on the matter is binding on both the person who raised the question and the heir.
What the law says
Questions as to advancement made, or alleged to have been made, by the deceased to any heir may be heard and determined by the court having jurisdiction of the estate proceedings; and the final order of the court thereon shall be binding on the person raising the questions and on the heir
Rule 90, Section 2 — Questions as to advancement to be determined. Read the full provision →
What Rule 90, Section 2 provides
Rule 90, Section 2 addresses this directly: "Questions as to advancement made, or alleged to have been made, by the deceased to any heir may be heard and determined by the court having jurisdiction of the estate proceedings; and the final order of the court thereon shall be binding on the person raising the questions and on the heir." The probate court is given authority to resolve this exact kind of question as part of the estate proceedings.
Why the final order is not just an opinion
The rule does not merely allow the court to weigh in — it says the final order "shall be binding." Once the probate court's order on the advancement question becomes final, it settles the question as a matter of law between the people it names, rather than leaving it as a preliminary finding that either side can reopen simply by filing another case later.
Who exactly is bound
The rule names the binding effect twice, deliberately covering both sides of the dispute. It binds "the person raising the questions" — whoever brought up the advancement issue, whether that is a co-heir, the estate's administrator, or someone else with a stake in the proceedings — and it binds "the heir" who allegedly received the advancement, meaning you. Neither side gets to treat the final order as open to relitigation once it stands.
What could still make a difference
This binding effect is tied specifically to a final order — an order still subject to appeal, or one that never actually resolved the advancement question on its merits, would not carry the same weight this rule describes. The rule also does not itself address any separate legal grounds that might exist for setting aside a final order in some other circumstance; it establishes that, absent such grounds, the ruling stands and binds both of you.