Court Reviews Whether Defendants Depleted the Decedent's Assets Such that they Deprived the Plaintiff of her Specific Bequest in the Will

IN RE ESTATE OF ELOISE J. STOREY, 

PEGGIE SHERRILL HUBER v. LAWRENCE G. YOHANEK, CPA, A/K/A LARRY G. YOHANEK, SHARRON S. YOHANEK, AND JOHN GARY STOREY (Tenn. Ct. App. May 31, 2011)



This lawsuit was filed by the decedent's daughter against other family members alleging undue influence, conversion, breach of fiduciary duty, and civil conspiracy. After the decedent suffered a stroke, the family members, as attorney in fact and signatory on the decedent's bank accounts, made gifts from the decedent's assets to themselves and to other family members.

After the decedent died, the plaintiff daughter filed this lawsuit, alleging that the defendant family members wrongfully depleted the decedent's assets during her lifetime so as to deprive the plaintiff of her specific bequest in the decedent's will. The defendants filed a motion for partial summary judgment on various grounds.

The trial court granted in part and denied in part the defendants' motion finding, inter alia, that the plaintiff did not submit evidence to support several of her claims, and that several claims were barred by the statute of limitations. The Plaintiff now appeals.

On appeal, we apply the Tennessee Supreme court's revised analytical framework for summary judgment motions, requiring the defendant movants to either conclusively establish facts supporting an affirmative defense or negate an essential element of the plaintiff's claim. Applying this standard, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.


Opinion available at:

http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2011/storeye_053111.pdf

Court Reviews a Motion to Marshal Assets and the Exercise of Personal Jurisdiction over a California Resident

THE ESTATE OF PAULINE VERNUSE BUTLER, v. PAUL V. PEEPLES, SR. (Tenn. Ct. App. May 26, 2011)



The representative of this Estate filed a "Motion to Marshal Assets" alleging that a California resident held assets of the Estate and had refused to turn them over to the Estate. The Trial Court summarily ordered the California resident to surrender any assets held and turn them over to the Estate. Paul V. Peeples, the California resident, filed a Motion in Probate Court that the Court had no personal jurisdiction over him, along with his affidavit. His Motion was denied. He appealed to this Court and we hold that he was not subject to the jurisdiction of the Trial Court and reverse the orders against him and dismiss him as a party to the probate estate action. 


Opinion available at:

http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2011/butlerv_052611.pdf 

Court Reviews a Whether a Will was the Product of Undue Influence

THOMAS L. GRIMES, ET AL. v. HELEN CORNELL (Tenn. Ct. App. May 24, 2011)



This appeal involves a will contest in which the trial court found that a will executed in 2005 was the product of undue influence and, as a consequence, admitted a will executed by the testator in 2004 to probate. The proponent of the 2005 Will appeals the finding of undue influence as well as the dismissal of her claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress and award of attorney's fees to Plaintiffs to be paid from the estate. We affirm the trial court in all respects.


Opinion available at:

http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2011/grimest_052411.pdf

Perpetuities Rule Finally Ends $100M Waiting Game for Lumber Baron’s Heirs, 92 Years After His Death

From ABA Journal: Perpetuities Rule Finally Ends $100M Waiting Game for Lumber Baron’s Heirs, 92 Years After His Death (Martha Neil)

The rule against perpetuities, which prevents estate distributions from dragging on endlessly by requiring a property interest conveyed in a will to vest, if at all, within 21 years of the death of individuals already in existence at the time of the testator's death, recently settled a deadlock over a Michigan lumber baron's will.

Martha Neil reports in the ABA Journal:

"Not allowed to collect their share of Wellington Burt's fortune until 21 years after the death of his youngest grandchild in existence when the patriarch cashed in his chips, the 12 great-, great-great- and great-great-great-grandchildren among Burt's surviving descendants are expected to see his trust open by the end of the month, the Associated Press reported. The heirs range in age from 19 to 94 years old.

Burt died in 1919."


Read the full story by Martha Neil here:
http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/perpetuities_rule_finally_ends_100m_waiting_game/

Court Reviews Whether Appellants Proved that Decedent Did Not Revoke Her Will

JANICE DAVIS BOELTER and RICHARD DAVIS v. JACKIE CURTUS REAGAN, ET AL. (Tenn. Ct. App. May 19, 2011)



Decedent executed a will in 1988 which could not be found upon her death. Decedent's stepchildren sought to establish a copy of the 1988 will as Decedent's last will and testament, but the trial court found that they had failed to rebut the presumption that the will had been destroyed and revoked. We find that Appellants failed to prove that Decedent did not revoke her will. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's involuntary dismissal of Appellants' claim as well as its order that Decedent's Estate be administered as an intestate estate.


Opinion available at:

http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2011/boelterj_051911.pdf

Jones' will ruled forgery with handwriting expert help

Judge Robert Benham ruled on May 6 that the signature on a will purporting to be that of the late state Rep. Ulysses Jones Jr. is a forgery. The will left the bulk of Jones' estate to Sandra Evette Richards, the woman who submitted the document following his death in November and who said Jones was her fiance. Benham said his opinion was swayed by shaky witness credibility and handwriting experts.

Read the full story here:
http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2011/may/06/judge-rules-signature-forgery-will-late-rep-ulysse/