Careers

Experiences

Industries

Offices

Our Firm

Pages

Our People

Updates

Practices

Warner Norcross + Judd LLP is a corporate law firm with over 230 attorneys serving clients in nine offices throughout Michigan. Among the largest law firms in Michigan, Warner works in virtually all areas of business law.

Michigan Law Firm - Warner Norcross + Judd LLP

In the Estate of Beverly Howe (Mich Ct App March 9, 2023) (unpublished), the Court of Appeals reviewed two tools employed at the probate court level to address a litigious beneficiary whose claims were causing the estate and trust to incur significant administrative expenses.&nbsp;

core/paragraph

First, the probate court fashioned a remedy in which the beneficiary had to personally fund the investigation of an estate claim.&nbsp;The beneficiary wanted the estate to pursue a medical-malpractice claim.&nbsp;The personal representative did an initial investigation and concluded there was no claim worthy of pursuit, but the beneficiary wanted to invest more estate funds into an additional investigation.&nbsp;The probate court struck a balance by ordering the beneficiary to pay $5,000 to fund the additional investigation, and if a meritorious medical malpractice claim resulted from those efforts, the beneficiary would be refunded.&nbsp;The probate court’s order was upheld as reasonable by the Court of Appeals.&nbsp;

Second, the probate court granted a motion that required the beneficiary to secure a bond that could fund the payment of anticipated estate and trust administration expenses to address the beneficiary’s claims.&nbsp;Under Michigan Court Rule 2.109(A), “[o]n a motion of a party against who a claim has been asserted in a civil action, if it appears reasonable and proper, the court may order the opposing party to file with the court clerk a bond with surety as required by the court in an amount sufficient to cover all costs and other recoverable expenses that may be awarded by the trial court, or if the claiming party appeals, by the trial and appellate courts.&nbsp;The court shall determine the amount in its discretion.”&nbsp;The probate court’s order granting the bond motion was also upheld.

As you can see, this decision may have a significant impact for similar probate cases with beneficiaries who are causing an estate and trust to incur exorbitant expenses. For questions on this and other probate litigation matters, please contact Laura Morris (<a href="mailto:lmorris@wnj.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">lmorris@wnj.com</a>; 616.752.2407) or David Skidmore (<a href="mailto:dskidmore@wnj.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">dskidmore@wnj.com</a>; 616.752.2491).

Michigan Probate Litigation Cases & News

Private Client and Family Office

Partner

Laura E. Morris

Estate Settlement and Trust Administration

Family Business and Succession Planning

Family Office Representation

Fiduciary Representation

Fundamental Estate Planning

Probate Litigation

Trusts and Estates

Two Methods to Curtail a Litigious Beneficiary in Probate Court

Warner Norcross + Judd LLP is responsible for the contents of our advertising and this website. Please read our full <a href="/privacy-policy/" aria-label="see privacy policy">privacy policy</a> available on our website. If you have any questions or comments about our website or our Privacy Policy please contact us at <a href="mailto:info@wnj.com">info@wnj.com</a> or 616.752.2000.

Two Methods to Curtail a Litigious Beneficiary in Probate Court

professionals