Nonsuit granted in will contest for fraud and undue influence, because contestant did not establish with a clear and convincing evidence that the decedent’s lack of English skills did not affect mental state for undue influence, when decedent was a successful businessman in the United States. Edelson Will, 2 Fid. Rep. 3d 385 (O.C. Montg. 2012) (Ott, J.)
The Court allowed for payment of widow’s attorney fees against estate under prenuptial agreement, which was a hybrid agreement of half hourly rate plus 20% recovered, but Court reduced attorney fees to full hourly rate plus $75,000. Campbell Estate (No. 2), 2 Fid. Rep. 3d 369 (O.C. Montg. 2012) (Opinion by Murphy, J.)
The court in a will contest for undue influence held that the widow of decedent lacked standing to compel an account from the decedent’s agent under power of attorney, because only the principal or the executor of the principal’s estate had standing as the agent was only a fiduciary of the principal. Griggs Estate (No. 2), 2 Fid. Rep. 3d 354 (O.C. Chester 2012) (Opinion by Tunnell, J.)
Issues before the Court in appeal from probate of will contest: (1) does trustee have standing; (2) does subpoena requesting decedent’s legal files violate attorney-client privilege and how should privilege be claimed per document; and (3) were the subpoenas for emails of decedent over 4 years overly broad. The court held that: (1) the trustee had standing as an aggrieved party, because the will contest affected beneficiaries of the trust and the trustee was a fiduciary of the beneficiaries; (2) the executor held the attorney-client privilege and a log should be created with sufficient information for each matter claimed as privileged; and (3) the subpoenas for email discovery were overly broad and needed to be narrowly tailored. Griggs Estate (No. 1), 2 Fid. Rep. 3d 346 (O.C. Chester 2012) (Opinion by Tunnell, J.)
Surviving wife held to be sole intestate heir of decedent despite being separated for more than one year, because the court held she did not willfully neglect or maliciously desert. Bortz Estate, 2 Fid. Rep. 3d 342 (O.C. Westm. 2012) (Opinion by McCormick, J.)
Issues were whether wife of decedent could elect against the will despite signing a waiver induced by fraud and whether filing petition to elect after statutory period because of fraud was justified; the Court did not find clear and convincing evidence of active fraud by son or attorney for estate in inducing waiver, and although waiver was invalid due to breach of fiduciary duty of attorney for estate, the Court found that the delay to elect against the will was not induced by active fraud and delay was unreasonable. Pantages Estate, 2 Fid. Rep. 3d 329 (O.C. Carbon 2012) (Opinion by Nanovic, P.J.)
Court denied petition to enjoin sale of real estate, because in light of all the circumstances the agreement lacked fraud or mistake. Ferrari Estate, 2 Fid. Rep. 3d 325 (O.C. Montg. 2011) (Opinion by McCormick, J.)
In dispute between co-executors as to the commission of one of the co-executors, who did little work and whom the other executor proposed giving no commission, Court awarded objecting co-executor 1% of the gross estate ($2,377,716), because to disallow would promote litigation and disunity between co-executors. Paller Estate, 2 Fid. Rep. 3d 322 (O.C. Montg. 2012) (Opinion by Ott, J.)
Court denied petition of guardian for sale of 43 acres after son opposed sale, because (i) the Court already approved sale of second property with house and (ii) the 43 acres includes a cellphone tower lease for $1300 per month that is sufficient for care. Haney, Incapacitated Person, 2 Fid. Rep. 3d 319 (O.C. Monroe 2012) (Opinion by Williamson, J.)
In objection to account, Court found that auctioneer did not present clear and convincing evidence of a contract, because writing violated statute of frauds. Zimmerman, Estate of A. Jeanette, 2 Fid. Rep. 3d 314 (O.C. Clinton 2012) (Opinion by Cherry, J., Specially Presiding)