Articles Posted in Probate Litigation

by

In a case involving Donald Howell, who was born with profound cognitive impairment and who had received a settlement of $11 million from a Chicago landlord from lead-poisoning, the issue here was, could the court “substitute judgment” on where his money would go at the time of his death? Relying on the “substituted judgment” doctrine, his co-guardians, Northern Trust Co. and LaTanya Turks, argued that Donald would want his money to go to Turks, his mother and full-time caretaker, rather than also being shared under Illinois Intestacy Law with family members, which included his father and ten half-siblings born to ten different women who allegedly had no significant role in his life.

Under the Illinois Probate Act, Section 11a-18(a-5) authorizes guardians to draft estate plans that depart from the default formula for distributing a decedent’s assets. That section of the statute, which refers to acting “in keeping with the ward’s wishes so far as they can be ascertained,” also says the “ward’s wishes, as best they can be ascertained, shall be carried out.”

In this probate matter, the “ward’s wishes” provisions were in conflict with the court- appointed guardian ad litem who opposed the estate plan suggested by Northern Trust and Turks. According to the guardian ad litem, the proposed estate plan was improper because Donald never had testamentary capacity and could not express any wishes about who would inherit his money on his death.

Continue reading

by

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit in Chicago has affirmed a decision by a United States district court judge regarding subject-matter jurisdiction and a voluntary dismissal of a complaint.

Mieczyslaw Kuznar, a native of Poland, moved to the United States leaving his wife, Emilia, and his son, Thomas, behind. While living in the United States, Kuznar married Anna, but never divorced Emilia. Kuznar died intestate in 1995. Anna began collecting spousal benefits from his pension the year of his death.

In 1997, Thomas, by that time an adult, opened a probate estate in the Illinois state court seeking judicial administration of his father’s estate. Thomas was acting on his mother’s behalf; she continued to live in Poland.

Continue reading

by

Mary Dicks died on Sept. 25, 2012. Her granddaughter, Jennifer Barber, was her closest living relative and her only heir. Barber claimed that Dicks died intestate and filed a petition to be named administrator of her estate.

However, Allison Ferconio, who was Dicks’s niece, filed a will with the Circuit Court. The will was dated May 23, 2012 naming Ferconio as executor and left Dicks’s estate to six individuals. On that list was Ferconio, but not Barber. The will was signed and witnessed by Richard Tebik and Robert Abraham who signed a standard attestation clause.

The attestation clause indicated that the will was signed in the presence of each of the two witnesses. There was a second attestation clause, claiming that Dicks signed the document as her will and acknowledged her signature in the presence of both witnesses. The court admitted the will and named Ferconio as her executor. Barber filed a request for a formal proof of will seeking the testimony of Tebik and Abraham.

Continue reading

by

F. Gary Kovac, the plaintiff in this matter, sued the estate of Kenneth L. Barron Jr. for compensatory damages and exemplary or punitive damages. In the majority of jurisdictions, punitive damages are not allowed after the death of the defendant tortfeasor.

Kovac and Barron owned 50% of three different corporations. In his original lawsuit, Kovac accused Barron of a pattern of serious misconduct, which included diverting millions of dollars from the businesses. Kovac sued Barron in Kane County, Ill. When Barron died, Kovac continued the lawsuit against the administrator of Barron’s estate who was his widow, Sandra Barron.

At the end of the bench trial, the trial judge ordered Barron’s estate to pay $3,220,702 for fraud and an additional $450,000 in punitive damages.

Continue reading

by

The Illinois Appellate Court has affirmed the decision by a Cook County associate judge who ordered the removal of the guardian of a disabled person.

On Feb. 24, 2009, Patricia Herard was adjudicated by the court to be disabled. Herard was diagnosed with “profound mental retardation and legal blindness.”  It was also reported that she has epilepsy, behavior reminiscent of autism and functioning “in the age ranges of 9 months to just fewer than 3 years.” Patricia’s mother was appointed her legal guardian.

An agreement was signed and delivered to the court between Herard’s parents, her guardian ad litem and the Bank of America.  The agreement required Herard’s parents to grant reasonable access to Herard for a court-appointed case manager, in this case, Rehab Assist Guardianship Services.  The reasonable access was intended to include both announced and unannounced visits.

Continue reading

by

Recently two Cook County Circuit Court judges, Judge Lynn M. Egan (Law Division) and Judge Mary Ellen Coghlan (Probate Division), developed an instructive PowerPoint program for Illinois lawyers, in an effort to clearly define the differences between wrongful death actions and survival actions in Illinois.

In a wrongful death act claim, the recovery would be for the exclusive benefit of the decedent’s surviving spouse and next-of-kin.  If the wrongful death was immediate with no pain and suffering associated with it, a special administrator could be appointed as the case is being filed. No probate estate would be necessary.

However, the confusion begins when a wrongful death act claim and a survival statute claim are both present. When a survival action is available to a plaintiff, the judges concur that a probate estate must be set up for the benefit of the decedent’s estate.  A survival action is like many personal injury cases in which there may be pain and suffering element to the case associated with the injury that later resulted in death. Where there is a portion of the recovery for damages related to pain and suffering by settlement or verdict, the sum associated with the survival action goes to the decedent’s estate, not to the next-of-kin or surviving spouse as it would if for the wrongful death action. 

Continue reading

by

The Bank of New York filed to foreclose on a mortgage owned by the decedent, Ruth Hatch. 

The foreclosure named her heirs as defendants. In December 2003, Jesse Hatch, the son of Ruth Hatch, filed a motion to dismiss. He claimed that he was an heir and that the Bank of New York had failed to obtain personal jurisdiction over him.

In the Jesse Hatch motion, he attached an affidavit stating that he had mailed a copy of the motion to the bank’s attorneys.  Thereafter, the bank contacted Hatch to inform him that a hearing was set for the next month and the bank would move for summary judgment, default judgment of foreclosure and sale and appointment of a foreclosure sales officer. 

Continue reading

by

In August 2005, Martin Stahling Sr. signed a statutory “short form” power of attorney for health care decisions under Section 4-10 of the Illinois Powers of Attorney for Health Care Law. He designated his son, Martin Stahling Jr. The subject of the controversy was the transfer by Stahling Sr. to a deed of acres of land to himself and Stahling Jr. as joint tenants. 

Stahling Sr. died in November 2007m bringing rise to the claim by his daughter, Martie Koehler, who maintained that (1) Stahler Jr. owed a fiduciary duty to his father and (2) there was a presumption that Stahling Jr. obtained the real estate by undue influence.

The question of law was certified by a Jersey County, Illinois, judge for immediate appeal to the Illinois Appellate Court. 

Continue reading