In re Estate of Fuchs, 297 Neb. 667

Gilbert R. Fuchs died May 29, 2012, survived by four children (Jim, Joseph, Julie, Jason).
Within a week, Jim and Joseph filed for informal appointment as copersonal representatives of Gilbert’s intestate estate, stating no will had been found; they were appointed.
On July 8, 2015, Joseph received by mail a 1987 will leaving the estate to Jim; Jim filed for formal probate July 15, 2015 (more than 3 years after death).
Julie and Jason objected, arguing the formal probate was time barred under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2408, that Jim was estopped by his prior representations and conduct, and that estate administration had progressed making probate improper.
The district court granted summary judgment for the objectors, holding the 3-year statute barred Jim’s petition and that Jim failed to prove equitable estoppel or entitlement to equitable tolling.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether § 30-2408’s 3-year bar is avoided because a prior informal proceeding was not fully completed	Jim: prior proceeding must be fully adjudicated to trigger the bar; incomplete proceedings do not preclude the subsection (4) exception	Objectors: any prior probate proceeding that "occurred" within 3 years (i.e., was commenced) bars late probate	Court: "occurred" means commenced; prior informal proceeding need not be completed — statute bars Jim’s late petition
Whether equitable estoppel prevents invocation of § 30-2408	Jim: someone suppressed the will; objectors represented there was no will and induced reliance, so estoppel should apply	Objectors: no evidence they knew of or concealed the will or intended suppression	Court: Jim failed to prove concealment, knowledge, intent, or justifiable reliance; estoppel not established
Whether equitable tolling excuses filing after 3 years	Jim: circumstances (disarray, documents scattered, late discovery) justify tolling	Objectors: Jim started the informal proceeding promptly and was not prevented by any authority; he could have delayed initial filing or searched further	Court: equitable tolling requires due diligence and typically involves restraint by a superior authority; Jim was not entitled to tolling

Clarke v. First Nat. Bank of Omaha, 296 Neb. 632 (discussing § 30-2408 limitations framework)
Thomas v. Board of Trustees, 296 Neb. 726 (summary judgment standard)
In re Estate of Nemetz, 273 Neb. 918 (consideration of § 30-2408 when no prior proceeding was commenced)
In re Estate of Harris, 379 Mont. 474 (Montana case interpreting a Uniform Probate Code–style 3-year bar)
Bryan M. v. Anne B., 292 Neb. 725 (elements of equitable estoppel)
Macke v. Jungels, 102 Neb. 123 (equitable tolling when plaintiff restrained from proceeding)