Gladys Hale and Oma Bolen v. Ricky Handshoe, Gary Handshoe, and Bertha Jimeniz (mem. dec.)
57A05-1510-PL-1655
| Ind. Ct. App. | Oct 19, 2016Background
- Annie Handshoe opened multiple CDs and named her children (and two grandchildren for her deceased son James) as joint or payable-on-death beneficiaries; two CDs titled to Annie and her son Thee ("Thee's CDs") later reverted to Annie's estate when Thee predeceased her.
- After Thee died in 2006 and Annie in 2007, family members (including Gladys and Oma) allegedly agreed to give Thee’s share to Thee’s children (Ricky, Gary, Bertha); an attorney-drafted Family Settlement Agreement (FSA) memorializing that agreement was circulated and signed by most family members but the plaintiffs did not retain a signed original.
- Kentucky probate proceedings resulted in Thee’s CDs being paid into Annie’s estate; some related accounts and life-insurance proceeds were distributed outside the estate and plaintiffs received those shares from some siblings but not from Gladys, Oma, and Randy.
- Plaintiffs filed breach-of-contract suit in Indiana (2014) claiming defendants failed to honor the FSA with respect to distributions from Thee’s CDs that ultimately were distributed from the estate (2011 and 2013 distributions).
- At bench trial the court credited testimony (Mary, Patty, Gary) that the FSA had been signed and notarized by defendants, found the FSA enforceable, and entered judgment for plaintiffs; Gladys and Oma appealed asserting no contract and a statute-of-limitations bar.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed: it deferred to trial court credibility findings, held the FSA was a legally binding agreement as found by the trial court, and ruled the action was filed within the six-year limitation period (breach occurred at the 2011/2013 estate distributions).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Existence/enforceability of a contract (FSA) | Plaintiffs: FSA was signed/notarized by defendants; defendants partially performed consistent with it; court should enforce it | Gladys/Oma: They never signed the FSA; no meeting of the minds; trial evidence insufficient | Court credited testimony of non-interested witnesses and found FSA was signed and enforceable; affirmed trial court credibility findings |
| Statute of limitations for breach claim | Plaintiffs: Cause of action accrued at the time of the breach (when estate distributions were not paid in 2011/2013), so suit (2014) was timely | Defendants: Cause accrued earlier (Feb/Oct 2007) so suit filed in 2014 was time-barred | Defendants waived review of the argument; on the merits court held breach accrued at the 2011/2013 distributions and the action was timely |
Key Cases Cited
- Johnson v. Wysocki, 990 N.E.2d 456 (Ind. 2013) (standards for reviewing Trial Rule 52 findings and clearly erroneous review)
- State v. Int'l Bus. Machines Corp., 51 N.E.3d 150 (Ind. 2016) (appellate deference to trial-court credibility determinations)
- Hall v. Hall, 27 N.E.3d 281 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015) (refusal to reweigh evidence/credibility on appeal)
- Northeastern Rural Elec. Membership Corp. v. Wabash Valley Power Ass'n, Inc., 56 N.E.3d 38 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016) (accrual rule: breach-of-contract accrues when breach occurs)
- Meisenhelder v. Zipp Exp., Inc., 788 N.E.2d 924 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003) (same accrual principle for contract claims)
- Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection & Ins. Co. v. White, 775 N.E.2d 1128 (Ind. Ct. App.) (trial-rule motion on the evidence waived if party presents evidence after motion denied)