Estate of Bartelson
2013 ND 129
| N.D. | 2013Background
- Ralph Bartelson died in 2008; GAPS was appointed as conservator and personal representative.
- Bartelson and Fischer alleged misappropriation by Valer and Haught; district court lacked jurisdiction over pre-2008 misappropriation claims, court reversed in 2011 and remanded for standing determination.
- On remand (2012), Bartelson sought to be the successor personal representative; district court denied.
- In August 2012, Bartelson petitioned to remove GAPS; Valer and Haught objected and the court later found the petition frivolous and awarded fees.
- August 2012 hearing was scheduled but not held; September 2012 Rule 60(b) motion to vacate was filed; a subsequent order denied the motion and affirmed prior rulings; new judge later addressed the matter and issued orders.
- This appeal challenges the denial of removal, the denial of the Rule 60(b) motion, and the fee award, with the result that the court reversed and remanded for a hearing on the petition.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standing to remove the personal representative | Bartelson is an interested person as a decedent’s child | Bartelson lacked an estate interest and thus standing | Bartelson had standing as an interested person |
| Requirement of a hearing on removal petitions | Hearing is mandatory under §30.1-17-11(1) | Court may deny petitions without a hearing if improper | Court abused discretion; remanded for a hearing |
| Procedural sufficiency under Rule 3.2 for hearing requests | Bartelson complied with service and timing; hearing needed | Procedural requirements not satisfied or timely | Procedural errors; remand for proper hearing and notice |
| Timeliness and effect of Rule 60(b) motion on appeal timing | 60(b) motion tolled the time to appeal | No tolling or improper basis | Appeal timely; but remand independent of tolling issues |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Estate of Hass, 2002 ND 82 (2002) (abuse of discretion standard for removal decisions)
- In re Estate of Cashmore, 2010 ND 159 (2010) (abuse of discretion; standard for fiduciary matters)
- State ex rel. Seibold v. Leverington, 2012 ND 25 (2012) (procedural requirements for hearings under Rule 3.2)
- In re Hehn, 2008 ND 36 (2008) (tolling of appeal time under Rule 60)