In Re the Estate of Bickel
879 N.W.2d 741
| S.D. | 2016Background
- Decedent Edward F. Bickel (d. Nov 4, 2009) executed a 2008 Will and multiple codicils (2008–2009) giving land to his children, trusts for Gail and Anne‑Marie, and various devise options favoring grandson Edward J. (Eddy); some documents contained erroneous legal descriptions (devise of land Edward F. did not own).
- Eddy received deeds during Edward F.’s life, was nominated as personal representative, and actively defended the testamentary instruments after Edward F.’s death; Eric Bogue was later appointed personal representative by stipulation.
- Gail (daughter) and Edward P. challenged the Will and Codicils as lacking testamentary capacity and the product of undue influence; a 2011 trial admitted the instruments to probate and Gail unsuccessfully appealed (appeal dismissed for defective service on heirs).
- Gail moved under SDCL 15‑6‑60(b) to vacate the 2011 order, arguing the June 2011 trial notice was not served on all heirs; the circuit court denied relief and later resolved competing construction questions by reforming the Will/Codicil to correct scrivener errors (reassigning specific quarter sections as the court found matched testator intent).
- The court held Eddy could lease Gail’s trust land at $10/acre per year (the Will’s $1,600/160‑acre figure), allowed rent offsets for overpayments, denied Gail’s waste/inspection claims, and awarded Eddy attorney’s fees under SDCL 29A‑3‑720 for substantially benefitting the estate; the Supreme Court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Gail) | Defendant's Argument (Eddy/PR) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Rule 60(b) relief for failure to serve heirs of 2011 trial | Trial notice to all heirs was required; failure voids judgment | No statutory command making trial‑level notice to all heirs jurisdictional; Gail had notice | Denied relief; court did not void the 2011 order |
| 2. Use of extrinsic evidence / reformation of Will/Codicil | Instruments are clear; cannot rewrite to correct devises of land not owned | Erroneous legal descriptions are scrivener errors; extrinsic evidence shows testator intent to convey specific parcels | Court may consider extrinsic evidence where ambiguity exists; reformed documents to effectuate intent |
| 3. Reassignment of specific parcels (SE 1/4 S2‑T18N‑R23 to Anne‑Marie; NE 1/4 S7‑T19N‑R24 to Eddy) | Misdescriptions mean property passes via residuary; cannot interpret to give parcels not named | Context and extrinsic testimony show decedent intended those specific parcels to be devised as reformed | Affirmed reformation; parcels distributed consistent with testator intent |
| 4. Lease terms, duration, and rent offset | $10/acre term conflicts with Codicil’s "reasonable price" amendment and statutory limits on long leases; lease should be presumed one year | Paragraph IX gives specific $1,600/160‑acre per year option; amendment to paragraph XIII did not supersede specific lease term; option is yearly and not a prohibited long‑term lease reserving rent | Court upheld $10/acre per year lease option, allowed year‑to‑year duration and rent offsets; no SDCL 43‑32‑2 or 43‑32‑3 violation |
| 5. Reimbursement for waste / shop inspection | Household items were damaged/wasted and must be reimbursed; shop may contain missing items | No evidence items were functional before death or that waste caused loss; no showing shop contains decedent's items | Denied: abuse of discretion not shown |
| 6. Award of attorney’s fees to Eddy | Fees are not a substantial benefit to estate; mostly benefited Eddy | Defending validity of the instruments preserved testamentary plan and substantially benefited estate | Affirmed: fees and expenses awarded under SDCL 29A‑3‑720; appellate fees partially awarded ($2,000) |
Key Cases Cited
- Rabo Agrifinance, Inc. v. Rock Creek Farms, 836 N.W.2d 631 (S.D. 2013) (Rule 60(b) motions on undisputed facts reviewed de novo)
- Estate of Geier, 809 N.W.2d 355 (S.D. 2012) (notice requirements for appeals to be served on heirs)
- In re Estate of Brownlee, 654 N.W.2d 206 (S.D. 2002) (will interpretation reviewed de novo; intent controls)
- Estate of Seefeldt, 720 N.W.2d 647 (S.D. 2006) (ambiguity permits extrinsic evidence to determine testamentary intent)
- Wagner v. Brownlee, 713 N.W.2d 592 (S.D. 2006) (attorney’s fees awarded when services substantially benefit the estate)
- Commercial Trust & Savings Bank v. Christensen, 535 N.W.2d 853 (S.D. 1995) (lease duration beyond statutory limit invalid where rent reserved)
- New Hampshire v. Maine, 532 U.S. 742 (U.S. 2001) (factors for applying judicial estoppel)