Word Document

Estate of Goick Case Brief

You must be logged in to download this document
Reviews
Shared by: mythri k
Stats
views:
63
downloads:
0
rating:
not rated
reviews:
0
posted:
1/29/2008
language:
English
pages:
0
Estate of Goick 275 Mont. 13, 909 P.2d 1165 (1996) • Michael and Barbara Goicks were married and had three kids. Michael filed for divorce. • They told everybody (including the judge) they considered themselves divorced. • While the two were going through the court procedures to finalize the divorce, Michael died. • They both agreed that the marriage was over, but they hadn't finished splitting up the assets and signing the paperwork. • Barbara moved to dismiss the divorce proceedings, and then filed a petition for adjudication of intestacy. • As the surviving spouse, she was entitled to a share, and was appointed the decedent's personal representative. • Barbara entered a distribution agreement with the kids' guardian ad litem to split the estate. • A guardian ad litem is a court appointed representative to look after the interests of a minor in situations like this. • Michael's mother, brother and sister filed an objection, claiming that Barbara was not a surviving spouse. • The Trial Court granted summary judgment to Barbara. Michael's relatives appealed. • The Montana Supreme Court affirmed. • The Montana Supreme Court found that Michael's relatives were not successors to the estate and they had no legal interest in the distribution of the estate. • Further, the Court found that a divorce decree cannot be based on an oral agreement, so the Goick's were not divorced until the paperwork was signed, no matter what they were saying. • Michael's relatives unsuccessfully argued that Barbara should be barred by equitable estoppel from claiming that she was not divorced when she had previously claimed that she was in the Divorce Court. • Since Barbara had never officially gotten a divorce according to Montana law, she wasn't taking an inconsistent position. • Michael's relatives unsuccessfully argued that Barbara had a conflict of interest because she stood to get money while she was also the personal representative. • There is nothing barring a person from acting as a personal representative even if they stand to inherit. Project Wonderful -Your ad here, right now, for as low as $0
Related docs
Estate of Goick Case Brief
Views: 63  |  Downloads: 0
Estate of Collins Case Brief
Views: 84  |  Downloads: 1
Estate of Kehler Case Brief
Views: 70  |  Downloads: 0
Estate of Murdock Case Brief
Views: 95  |  Downloads: 1
Estate of Nielson Case Brief
Views: 58  |  Downloads: 0
Estate of Wilson case Brief
Views: 102  |  Downloads: 1
Estate of Woodworth Case Brief
Views: 57  |  Downloads: 0
In re Demaris Estate Case Brief
Views: 49  |  Downloads: 0
In re Estate of Beale Case Brief
Views: 45  |  Downloads: 0
In re Estate of Cooper Case Brief
Views: 96  |  Downloads: 2
In re Estate of Gibbs Case Brief
Views: 90  |  Downloads: 2
In re Estate of Laura Case Brief
Views: 85  |  Downloads: 3
In re Estate of Martineau Case Brief
Views: 72  |  Downloads: 2
In re Estate of Parsons Case Brief
Views: 49  |  Downloads: 0
In re Estate of Russell Case Brief
Views: 80  |  Downloads: 3
In re Estate of Shannon Case Brief
Views: 94  |  Downloads: 2
Other docs by mythri k