792 N.W.2d 120
Minn. Ct. App.2011Background
- Greer was under conservatorship and guardianship from 2005–2007; WF was conservator and PFI guardian; Ostrom represented PFI as attorney.
- Probate court orders during guardianship/conservatorship approved WF’s and PFI’s actions, including accounts and a reverse mortgage; Greer did not appeal these orders.
- In 2009, Greer sued WF, PFI, and Ostrom alleging fiduciary breaches, negligence, and emotional distress; she sought damages for conduct during/after guardianship.
- District court dismissed WF and PFI claims as collateral attacks on probate orders and dismissed Ostrom on judgment on the pleadings.
- Greer argued she could challenge conduct despite incapacitation; court held collateral-attack doctrine barred the claims as to WF and PFI; Ostrom could not be liable absent a fiduciary duty tied to Greer.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether WF and PFI claims are barred collateral attacks or res judicata | Greer contends not collateral attacks; seeks redress for mismanagement | WF and PFI argue final probate orders bar claims | Yes; claims barred as collateral attacks on probate orders |
| Whether Ostrom can be liable to Greer for disclosures | Ostrom breached fiduciary duties as PFI’s attorney | Ostrom owed no direct duty to Greer; not acting as client | Yes; district court correctly dismissed judgment on pleadings; no fiduciary duty found toward Greer |
Key Cases Cited
- Bengtson v. Setterberg, 227 Minn. 337, 35 N.W.2d 623 (1949) (collateral attack rule applies to probate orders)
- Kelly v. Kelly, 304 Minn. 237, 229 N.W.2d 526 (1975) (collateral attack barred on guardianship orders)
- Rickel v. Peck, 211 Minn. 576, 2 N.W.2d 140 (1942) (collateral attack barred on guardianship intermediate accounts)
- Winjum v. Jesten, 191 Minn. 294, 253 N.W. 881 (1934) (collateral attack barred on guardianship final accounts)
- Wold v. People’s Trust & Sav. Bank, 179 Minn. 523, 229 N.W. 785 (1930) (final account disclosures prophylactically barred collateral attacks)
- Hoverson v. Hoverson, 216 Minn. 237, 12 N.W.2d 497 (1943) (accounts adjudicate propriety of guardian charges; may affect collateral claims)
- Trapp v. Trapp, 182 Minn. 537, 235 N.W. 29 (1931) (collateral attack limitations; avenues to reopen for fraud/mistake)