Candace Curtis v. Anita Brunsting
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 524
| 5th Cir. | 2013Background
- In 1996, Elmer H. Brunsting and Nelva E. Brunsting created the Brunsting Family Living Trust for their issue, funded with various assets.
- Both Brunstings’ wills included pour-over provisions directing estate property to the Trust upon death.
- Elmer Brunsting died in 2009 and Nelva Brunsting died in 2011; dispute arises over Trust administration.
- Candace Curtis filed a 2012 federal diversity action alleging co-trustees Anita and Amy Brunsting breached fiduciary duties and engaged in related torts.
- The district court tentatively noted lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under the probate exception and later sua sponte dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction.
- Probate proceedings were ongoing elsewhere, but there was no showing that the Texas probate court had custody of the Trust assets at the time of dismissal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether probate exception deprives federal court of jurisdiction | Curtis: exception applies, allowing claims related to the estate unless interfering with probate. | Brunstings: probate excision bars federal claims touching probate assets. | Probate exception does not apply; case outside probate scope. |
| Whether the Trust assets are within state probate custody | Trust assets are estate assets subject to probate proceedings. | Trust assets are not estate assets and are not in probate custody. | Trust assets are not in probate custody; not subject to probate restraint. |
| Role of Marshall v. Marshall in delineating probate exception scope | Marshall allows in personam fiduciary claims not involving probate of a will. | Marshall limited probate exception to in rem or probate-dispositive acts. | Marshall permits jurisdiction over non-probate in personam claims; not barred here. |
Key Cases Cited
- Markham v. Allen, 326 U.S. 490 (1946) (probate exception distinguishes in rem probate from related claims)
- Marshall v. Marshall, 547 U.S. 293 (2006) (limits probate exception to in rem or custody of probate assets; allows related federal claims)
- Borden v. Allstate Ins. Co., 589 F.3d 168 (5th Cir. 2009) (describes jurisdictional framework for probate-related disputes)