Kibbee v. First Interstate Bank
242 P.3d 973
Wyo.2010Background
- Mercedes Kibbee and Chandler Kibbee married in 1947; they accrued a large estate (~$32 million) and Chandler died in 1992.
- Mercedes established a 1996 revocable trust providing for Sharon, Peter, and Aurora after her death.
- Mercedes granted durable power of attorney to Peter and Aurora in 2000; in 2005 she was in a nursing home after a hip fracture.
- In 2005–2006 Mercedes authorized changes to estate planning; doctors’ affidavits and family solicited influence over capacity.
- Mercedes signed multiple 2006 estate documents (Sharon not present at most meetings); First Interstate Bank and attorney Leonard advised; documents funded charitable remainder/lead trusts for Sharon, Peter, Aurora, and Joshua.
- Peter filed suit in 2007 challenging incapacity and undue influence; Sharon moving for summary judgment on interference claim; court granted summary judgment on all issues, affirmed on appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mental capacity to execute the questioned documents | Kibbee argues Mercedes lacked capacity after 2005. | Appellees contend prima facie capacity shown by witnesses. | Capacity shown; burden shifted to Kibbee to prove lack of capacity. |
| Undue influence by Sharon in executing the estate documents | Kibbee asserts Sharon unduly influenced Mercedes. | Appellees show no material fact of undue influence; professionals safeguarded wishes. | No disputed material facts; no undue influence established. |
| Admissibility of expert affidavits lacking attached documents under Rule 56(e) | Affidavits relied on medical records; documents should be considered. | Affidavits must attach referenced documents; otherwise defective. | Affidavits properly struck for failure to attach relied documents. |
| Adoption/viability of the tort of intentional interference with an inheritance expectancy | There is a recognized tort; case should analyze viability. | Wyoming has limited or no adoption of this tort; probate forum issues. | Insufficient record to adopt new tort; affirmed summary judgment on this claim. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hilbert v. Benson, 917 P.2d 1152 (Wyo. 1996) (capacity to understand trust terms governs testamentary capacity rules)
- McLean, 2004 WY 126, 99 P.3d 999 (Wyo. 2004) (attorney/treating physician observations support capacity; prima facie sufficiency)
- Retz v. Siebrandt, 181 P.3d 84 (Wyo. 2008) (undue influence requires four elements; burden shifting on summary judgment)
- Spear v. Nicholson, 882 P.2d 1237 (Wyo. 1994) (discussion of adoption of new torts in probate context)
- Brosius, 683 P.2d 663 (Wyo. 1984) (undue influence requires active exertion affecting testator's will)
- Hatton v. Energy Elec. Co., 148 P.3d 8 (Wyo. 2006) (summary judgment evidence must be competent; Rule 56(e) adherence)
- Western Sur. Co. v. Town of Evansville, 675 P.2d 258 (Wyo. 1984) (addressing admissibility of expert affidavits and underlying data)
- Greenwood v. Wierdsma, 741 P.2d 1079 (Wyo. 1987) (summary judgment procedure requires attached documents and admissible evidence)