Louis Curt Pannagl v. David Lambert
166 So. 3d 39
| Miss. Ct. App. | 2014Background
- Lambert petitioned in Pike County Chancery to probate Louis S. Pannagl Jr.'s will after the original could not be found.
- Louis had written a handwritten document indicating changes and that prior wills were destroyed; document later linked to alleged revocation intent.
- Lambert learned of the handwritten document from Kellems’s deposition and later gave documents to Holmes, who filed the probate petition without including the handwritten document.
- Curt and Sammi challenged the petition; Curt moved for sanctions under Rule 11 and the Litigation Accountability Act after summary judgment was granted for Lambert’s position.
- The chancellor denied sanctions; on appeal, the court held the denial was an abuse of discretion and reversed/remanded for fee determination.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether nondisclosure of a key document supports sanctions. | Lambert had no intent to deceive; document was not disclosed yet. | Lambert concealed the handwritten document to defeat the will’s probate. | Abuse of discretion; sanctions warranted. |
| Whether the filing was frivolous under Rule 11 and the LAA. | There was hope of success; petition relied on lost-original presumption. | Document undermines the petition; filing lacked substantial justification. | Frivolous filing; sanctions appropriate. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Spencer, 985 So. 2d 330 (Miss. 2008) (abuse of discretion standard for sanctions)
- In re Estate of Ladner, 909 So. 2d 1051 (Miss. 2004) (misrepresentation supporting sanctions under Rule 11 and LAA)
- In re Necaise, 126 So. 3d 49 (Miss. Ct. App. 2013) (misrepresentation causing unnecessary fees; sanctions)
- Tricon Metals & Servs. Inc. v. Topp, 537 So. 2d 1331 (Miss. 1989) (objective standard for “hope of success” in frivolous claims)
- Collins v. Koppers Inc., 59 So. 3d 582 (Miss. 2011) (abuse-of-discretion standard in sanctions decisions)