In Re the Estate of Strader
301 Kan. 50
Kan.2014Background
- Betty Jo Strader died in 2006; no executed will was found by family searches, and an intestacy administration was opened in December 2006.
- Administrators began selling estate property; a petition for administration and certain distributions were contested by daughter Janet Pralle.
- In February 2011 an executed will was discovered in the law firm's lockbox more than 4 years after death. Eric Strader filed to admit the will to probate under K.S.A. 59-618.
- Janet objected, asserting K.S.A. 59-617’s six-month statute of limitations barred probate and that K.S.A. 59-618’s exception applies only when a will was "knowingly withheld."
- The district court admitted the will relying on Court of Appeals precedent; the Court of Appeals affirmed. The Kansas Supreme Court granted review to resolve conflicting appellate interpretations.
- The Supreme Court reversed, holding K.S.A. 59-618 requires the will have been knowingly withheld to invoke the 90-day savings exception, and awarded Janet appellate attorney fees under K.S.A. 59-1504.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Whether K.S.A. 59-618 allows admission of a will filed after 6 months when the will was not knowingly withheld | Pralle: K.S.A. 59-617 bars probate after 6 months; K.S.A. 59-618 applies only if the will was "knowingly withheld" | Strader: The statute should protect innocent beneficiaries regardless of whether a will was knowingly withheld; public policy favors probate of every lawful will | Court: K.S.A. 59-618’s plain language limits the exception to wills that were knowingly withheld; will not admitted under the statute when merely lost/misplaced |
| 2. Whether Pralle is entitled to appellate attorney fees | Pralle: Entitled to fees under K.S.A. 59-1504 and Supreme Court Rule 7.07(b) for successful opposition to probate | Strader: Argued fees would be inequitable (bad faith) and excessive | Court: Fees authorized by K.S.A. 59-1504; reduced award to $8,146.90 for work before the Supreme Court and ordered payment from the estate |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Estate of Tracy, 36 Kan. App. 2d 401 (Kan. Ct. App. 2006) (Court of Appeals decision that allowed late probate for an "innocent beneficiary" and emphasized policy favoring probate of valid wills)
- In re Estate of Seth, 40 Kan. App. 2d 824 (Kan. Ct. App. 2008) (Court of Appeals decision interpreting "such will" to mean a will that was knowingly withheld)
- In re Estate of Harper, 202 Kan. 150 (Kan. 1968) (recognized statutory policy that wills should be offered for probate but acknowledged the statutory time limit)
- In re Estate of Colyer, 157 Kan. 347 (Kan. 1943) (affirmed denial of probate where will was not timely offered under then-applicable time limit)