INTESTATE HEIR LACKS STANDING TO SET ASIDE ESTATE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
In the will and estate litigation case of The Estate of Anne vs. Ballinger, Deceased, PICS Case No 16-1596 (C.P. Philadelphia Nov. 9, 2016) the Honorable Matthew D. Carafiello ruled that the petitioner, an intestate heir had no standing to set aside a settlement agreement between the estate and remaining intestate heirs where petitioner had knowledge of other intestate heirs’ will contest and expressly choose not to join the contest or subsequent settlement agreement, negotiations or to file his own probate appeal.
Bernard Weisser appealed form the order of the trial court that dismissed his petition to set aside a settlement agreement for lack of standing. Decedent Anne Ballinger dies testate, with her will leaving her entire estate to Steven Haus and nominating him executor. After the will was admitted to probate and letters testamentary issued to Haus legal counsel on behalf of William Weisser, an intestate heir of the decedent, filed a probate appeal. Appellant, through counsel, sent a letter to the court expressly indicating that he did not wish to participate in the probate appeal, in which all the intestate heirs minus appellant were participating in.
The will contest ultimately resulted in a settlement agreement between Haus and the 6 participating intestate heirs, in which the parties’ agreed that Haus would remain executor and the proceeds of the estate would be divided equally among them in exchange for the heirs dismissing their will contest with prejudice. Nine months after the court approved the settlement agreement; appellant filed the present petition to set aside the settlement agreement, asserting that he had been deprived of his right to preserve his intestate right to decedent’s estate. However, the court dismissed the petition, finding that appellant lacked standing.
The trial court argued that it properly dismissed appellant’s petition for lack of standing. It noted that the statutes cited by appellant as purportedly conferring a right to petition the court related solely to accounting and distributions, which were not at issue since the underlying probate appeal concerned a will contest. The trial court argued appellant lacked standing to challenge either the will contest proceeding or the settlement agreement that resolved it because appellant had notice of the will contest, because appellant wrote to the court expressly choosing to decline to assert his rights as an intestate heir, either by participating in the remaining of 6 intestate heirs’ will contest or filing his own probate appeal. Because appellant elected to do neither to assert his rights as an intestate heir, the trial court argued that appellant therefore had no standing to object to the settlement agreement in whose negotiations appellant choose not to participate.
Reference: Digest of Recent Opinions, Pennsylvania Law Weekly, 40 PLW 20 (January 3, 2017)
Filed Under: Will Contest, Settlement Agreement
Kindly visit our Wills, Trusts and Estate Litigation website for more information on this topic.