Trust BCLP

Trust BCLP

removal of personal representative

Main Content

Personal Representative Should Have Been Removed For Conflict Of Interest

September 16, 2015

Authors

Luke Lantta

Personal Representative Should Have Been Removed For Conflict Of Interest

September 16, 2015

by: Luke Lantta

It’s not often that a personal representative asks a court to remove her.  It’s probably less often that a trial court refuses to remove a personal representative who asks to be removed.  But, that was the situation before the Court of Appeals of Wisconsin in Rapp v. Weller.  The appellate court, however, ultimately decided that the personal representative should be removed for an unmanageable conflict of interest.  What was the conflict of interest?

The personal representative had conflicts stemming from her fiduciary duties to the estate she represented and her personal interest as an heir of that same estate.  Laura Rapp had been appointed as personal representative for her brother Laurence Berg’s estate.  She participated in a mediation and signed a settlement agreement on the estate’s behalf.

Read More

Conflict Of Interest Warranted Judicial Removal Of Personal Representative And Trustee

October 31, 2013

Authors

Luke Lantta

Conflict Of Interest Warranted Judicial Removal Of Personal Representative And Trustee

October 31, 2013

by: Luke Lantta

Individual trustees who must administer real property often attempt to save the trust money by personally making certain improvements, repairs, or maintenance to the property.  They then charge the trust for the work they performed.  As the Nebraska Court of Appeals points out in In re Estate of Robb, however, these acts – however well-intentioned – may be self-dealing and can put the trustee in a position of a conflict of interest, which can warrant removal from that fiduciary position.

Read More

Utah Probate Court Was Authorized To Appoint Personal Representative More Than Three Years After Decedent’s Death

June 11, 2012

Authors

Luke Lantta

Utah Probate Court Was Authorized To Appoint Personal Representative More Than Three Years After Decedent’s Death

June 11, 2012

by: Luke Lantta

In an attempt to provide certainty to property rights, the Utah Legislature included in the Utah Probate Code a provision that limits certain proceedings where neither an heir nor a creditor has requested the administration of an estate within three years of the decedent’s death (Utah Code 75-3-107).

In In the Matter of the Estate of Eleanor Strand, a party alleged that this limitation extended to the ability of the probate court to appoint a personal representative of an intestate estate more than three years after the decedent’s death.  Not so, said the Utah Court of Appeals, and here’s why.

Read More
The attorneys of Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner make this site available to you only for the educational purposes of imparting general information and a general understanding of the law. This site does not offer specific legal advice. Your use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and Bryan Cave LLP or any of its attorneys. Do not use this site as a substitute for specific legal advice from a licensed attorney. Much of the information on this site is based upon preliminary discussions in the absence of definitive advice or policy statements and therefore may change as soon as more definitive advice is available. Please review our full disclaimer.