Schilling v. Herrera - Lecture notes 11 PDF

Preview

Summary

Trust & Estates 2019 Fall course; Casebook: Dukiminier - Case Brief and Lecture Notes...

Description

Schilling v. Herrera (2007) Parties: o Edward Schilling, plaintiff (decedents brother) o Herrera, defendant (decedents caretaker) Facts: o P sues D for intentional interference with an expectancy of inheritance o Helen Schilling, the decedent executed her will, naming her brother and only heir at law as her personal representative and sole beneficiary o May 1997- she executed a durable power of atty named mr.schilling as her attorney in fact o Dec 1999-she gets renal disease, and names mr schlling as her attorney in fact for health care decisions o While the decedent was at the Claridge house for rehabilititation, Ms. Herrera became involved in caring for her o Decedent eventually moved in w/Herrera when her condition worsened & paid her for her services & rent for living w/her o Sept 2003- w/o mr schillings knowledge, ms Herrera convinced the decedent to prep and execute a new power of attorney named ms Herrera as atty in fact and executing a new will naming Herrera as personal representative and sole beneficiary of the decedents estate o Aug 6 2004- decedent died at Herrera home An action for tortious interference with an expectancy is not a will contest. It does not challenge the probate or validity of a will, but rather seeks to recover tort damages from a third party for tortious interference To state a cause of action for intentional interference with an expectancy of inheritance, the complaint must allege the following elements: 1. the existence of an expectancy 2. intentional interference with the expectancy through tortious conduct 3. causation 4. damages Plaintiffs will be barred from pursuing their claim for intentional interference with an expectancy of inheritance if they had an adequate remedy in probate (and a fair opportunity to pursue their remedy)...