In re Estate of Fuchs
297 Neb. 667
| Neb. | 2017Background
- Decedent Gilbert Fuchs died May 29, 2012, survived by four children (Jim, Joseph, Julie, Jason). His papers were disorganized across two homes and vehicles.
- Within a week of Gilbert’s death (June 2012), Jim and Joseph filed an application for informal appointment as co-personal representatives of the intestate estate, asserting no will was found after reasonable diligence.
- In July 2015 Joseph received by mail an envelope containing Gilbert’s 1987 will (bequeathing the estate to Jim); Joseph gave the will to Jim, who then filed for formal probate and appointment.
- Julie and Jason objected, arguing the formal probate was time-barred by Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2408’s 3-year limit, and alternatively asserting estoppel and that estate administration had already begun.
- The district court granted summary judgment for the objectors, holding the 3-year statute barred probate because an earlier informal probate proceeding had occurred within the limitation period, and Jim failed to prove equitable estoppel or equitable tolling.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Jim) | Defendant's Argument (Julie & Jason) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Applicability of § 30-2408 3-year bar to late probate | The prior informal proceeding was not "completed," so § 30-2408’s exception applies and formal probate is allowed | Any prior formal or informal probate that "occurred" within 3 years bars later probate; "occur" does not require completion | The court held a prior proceeding need only have "occurred" (commenced); statute bars Jim’s 2015 probate filing |
| Equitable estoppel to overcome statute of limitations | The will was deliberately suppressed by an heir (or other person) until after the 3-year bar, so objectors should be estopped from asserting the statute | No evidence any heir concealed the will or intended suppression; searches occurred and parties had access | Court held Jim failed to prove elements of equitable estoppel; speculative allegations insufficient |
| Equitable tolling of the 3‑year period | The chaotic condition of Gilbert’s records and later discovery justify tolling; Jim exercised diligence | Jim initiated informal probate within a week of death and was not prevented by any authority; no basis for tolling | Court held equitable tolling unavailable: no impediment like injunction and Jim lacked the requisite circumstances/due diligence |
| Summary judgment standard | Jim argued factual disputes (who suppressed will, when found) precluded summary judgment | Objectors argued evidence did not create a genuine issue and claims were time-barred as a matter of law | Court affirmed summary judgment for defendants; nonmoving party’s conjecture insufficient to defeat summary judgment |
Key Cases Cited
- Clarke v. First Nat. Bank of Omaha, 296 Neb. 632 (2017) (interpreting § 30-2408 and limits on post-death probate)
- Thomas v. Board of Trustees, 296 Neb. 726 (2017) (summary judgment review standards)
- In re Estate of Nemetz, 273 Neb. 918 (2007) (addressing commencement of probate after § 30-2408 period when no prior proceeding occurred)
- In re Estate of Harris, 379 Mont. 474 (2015) (applying Uniform Probate Code exception where no succession or administration proceeding occurred within three years)
- Bryan M. v. Anne B., 292 Neb. 725 (2016) (elements of equitable estoppel)
- State v. Beitel, 296 Neb. 781 (2017) (statutory interpretation principles)