Inesha Grooms v. Last Will & Testament of Alexander Grooms, Benjamin Mark Wilson, Cynthia M. Peterkin
2022-0602-CDW
Del. Ch.Jun 5, 2025Background
- This case involved a challenge to the validity of the Last Will and Testament of Henry Alexander Grooms, which had already been admitted to probate.
- The original petitioner, Inesha Renae Grooms, sought to invalidate the will but passed away in 2023; her estate representative, Lisa Blackston, was substituted as petitioner and proceeded in forma pauperis.
- A trial was held in February 2025, after which the court found that the petitioner failed to show Grooms lacked testamentary capacity or was unduly influenced when the will was executed.
- Respondent Wilson, an heir and administrator, moved for costs and attorney’s fees to be paid from the petitioner’s share of the estate.
- The court considered whether costs and/or attorney’s fees were appropriate under Delaware’s court rules and the American Rule, focusing on exceptions such as bad faith and common benefit.
- The court ultimately granted costs, to be deducted from the estate's share, but denied attorney’s fees.
Issues
| Issue | Petitioner’s Argument | Respondent’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Awarding Costs to Respondent | Petitioner did not address costs in opposition | Prevailing party should get costs under Rule 54(d) | Costs granted to Respondent, deducted from Petitioner’s share |
| Awarding Attorney’s Fees (Bad Faith Exception) | No bad faith; claims sincerely held | Petitioner’s claims were baseless and not diligently prosecuted | No clear evidence of bad faith; fees denied |
| Awarding Attorney’s Fees (Common Benefit Exception) | No common benefit created | Defense created substantial benefit for heirs | No additional benefit created; fees denied |
| Financial Hardship Exception to Costs | Implicit hardship due to in forma pauperis status | Costs should be deducted from estate, not paid directly | Deduction from inheritance appropriate to avoid hardship |
Key Cases Cited
- RBC Capital Markets, LLC v. Jervis, 129 A.3d 816 (Del. 2015) (describing the high bar and clear evidence required for bad faith exception)
- Arbitrium (Cayman Islands) Handels AG v. Johnston, 705 A.2d 225 (Del. Ch. 1997) (reaffirming the American Rule that parties generally bear their own legal fees)
- Dover Historical Society, Inc. v. City of Dover Planning Commission, 902 A.2d 1084 (Del. 2006) (explaining the common benefit doctrine in fee shifting)
- Beck v. Atlantic Coast PLC, 868 A.2d 840 (Del. Ch. 2005) (fee-seeker bears a stringent burden of proof for bad faith)