In Re Last Will & Testament of Quigley, 21 A.3d 393

In 1979, John L. Quigley created a testamentary trust for his wife Jacqueline and five children, including Craig A. Quigley, with amendments and codicils thereafter.
In 2003, trustees filed a petition in Superior Court seeking, among other things, reform of the trust to provide income to Jacqueline for life and distributions to children upon ages 25, as they believe the decedent intended.
Exhibits attached to the petition showed Craig consented to trustee resignations and to a successor trustee, but no explicit consent to reform was attached to the reform request itself.
On June 6, 2003, the court granted the petitions, including reform of the trust, after hearings where counsel for interested parties appeared and argued the petitions.
Craig did not timely challenge the 2003 order; in 2009 he moved to vacate under Rule 60(b), arguing lack of service and defects in notice, which the Superior Court denied, and the Rhode Island Supreme Court affirmed.
The Supreme Court held the 2003 reform order not void for lack of service and affirmed denial of the 60(b) motion, concluding notice was adequately provided through consent forms and counsel participation.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the 2003 reform order was void for lack of service	Quigley: no Rule 4 summons; due process violated; void judgment	Bank of America: Craig was not a defendant; notice via consent forms sufficed; service not required	Not void; notice adequate; no Rule 4 service required
Whether relief under Rule 60(b)(4) was warranted for voidness due to lack of service	Quigley: due process denied; judgment void	Bank of America: not a void order; Craig had actual notice and counsel representation	No; order not void for lack of service
Whether relief under Rule 60(b)(6) was appropriate given delay and circumstances	Quigley: extraordinary factors; should vacate for fairness	Bank of America: motion untimely; prejudice to others; finality favored	Motion not timely; unreasonable delay; affirmed denial
Whether the gross-misrepresentation argument against Kalander was preserved and merits relief	Quigley: Kalander misrepresented him; lacked authorization	Bank of America: failure to raise fraud; representation binding absent fraud	Waived; not considered on appeal

Shannon v. Norman Block, Inc., 106 R.I. 124 (1969) (void judgment when due process denied; strict service standards)
Nisenzon v. Sadowski, 689 A.2d 1037 (R.I. 1997) (Rule 60(b)(4) void judgments; unqualified right to relief)
Kildeer Realty v. Brewster Realty Corp., 826 A.2d 961 (R.I. 2003) (jurisdiction and void judgments; timing matters not for voidness)
Labossiere v. Berstein, 810 A.2d 210 (R.I. 2002) (due process and exceptions under 60(b)(4))
Allstate Insurance Co. v. Lombardi, 773 A.2d 864 (R.I. 2001) (due process considerations under 60(b) analysis)
Farm Credit Bank of Baltimore v. Ferrera-Goitia, 316 F.3d 62 (1st Cir. 2003) (reasonable time for Rule 60(b)(6) depends on circumstances)
Allen v. South County Hospital, 945 A.2d 289 (R.I. 2008) (federal guidance on reasonable time standard for 60(b) motions)
Hall v. Insurance Co. of North America, 727 A.2d 667 (R.I. 1999) (context for 60(b) timing and notice considerations)
Arena v. City of Providence, 919 A.2d 379 (R.I. 2007) (prejudice and delay considerations in relief decisions)