History
  • No items yet
midpage
Michael R. Pilkington v. Karen A. Pilkington
2017 Ind. App. LEXIS 95
| Ind. Ct. App. | 2017
Read the full case

Background

  • Flannan Pilkington died in 2006 leaving a testamentary trust holding his interests in five LLCs; wife Karen was life beneficiary/trustee and remainder beneficiaries were her stepsons Michael and Patrick.
  • The trust contained a spendthrift clause prohibiting creditors from invading the trust to satisfy debts of the wife or residual beneficiaries.
  • Michael filed Chapter 7 in 2009; the bankruptcy trustee sold Michael’s interest in the LLCs to Karen at auction via broad quitclaim deeds (describing “any interest [Michael] may have”).
  • In 2015 Michael sued Karen in Delaware Circuit Court alleging breach of fiduciary duty as trustee and seeking an accounting, removal as trustee, restoration of trust assets, and damages; he asserted his remainder beneficiary interest remained despite the bankruptcy sale.
  • Karen moved to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, arguing Michael’s claim depended on a bankruptcy-court determination that his interest was extinguished and thus was exclusively or primarily a federal bankruptcy matter; the trial court dismissed with prejudice, finding Michael’s suit improperly attacked prior proceedings and he could have intervened earlier.
  • The Court of Appeals reversed, holding the state trial court has jurisdiction to decide whether Michael’s beneficiary/remainder interest survived the bankruptcy and remanded for further proceedings on that threshold question.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Whether the state court has subject-matter jurisdiction to adjudicate Michael’s trustee-breach and related claims because resolution requires determining if his remainder beneficiary interest survived bankruptcy Michael: his remainder interest was protected by the trust’s spendthrift clause and could not be sold by the bankruptcy trustee; his claims are state-law trust claims not within exclusive bankruptcy jurisdiction Karen: the bankruptcy sale and court orders divested Michael of any interest; only the bankruptcy court can decide what was sold and thus the state court lacks jurisdiction Court: state (circuit) court has jurisdiction to decide whether Michael’s beneficiary interest survived the bankruptcy; reversed dismissal and remanded for determination of that threshold issue

Key Cases Cited

  • Cochran v. Rodenbarger, 736 N.E.2d 1279 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000) (inadmissible materials not considered on appeal)
  • Santiago v. Kilmer, 605 N.E.2d 237 (Ind. Ct. App. 1992) (definition of subject-matter jurisdiction inquiry)
  • Harp v. Ind. Dep’t of Highways, 585 N.E.2d 652 (Ind. Ct. App. 1992) (scope of authority inquiry for jurisdiction)
  • Mishler v. Cnty. of Elkhart, 544 N.E.2d 149 (Ind. 1989) (presumption that courts of general jurisdiction have subject-matter jurisdiction)
  • GKN Co. v. Magness, 744 N.E.2d 397 (Ind. 2001) (standard for reviewing dismissal for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction when resolving facts on paper)
  • Matter of Wood, 825 F.2d 90 (5th Cir. 1987) (bankruptcy courts have exclusive jurisdiction only over the bankruptcy petition itself)
  • Matter of Brady, Texas, Mun. Gas Corp., 936 F.2d 212 (5th Cir. 1991) (state courts have concurrent jurisdiction over matters "arising in" or "related to" bankruptcy unless Congress provides otherwise)
  • In re Estate of Odenreider, 837 N.W.2d 756 (Neb. 2013) (probate court properly determined what interest was sold at prior bankruptcy auction)
  • Marshall v. Marshall, 547 U.S. 293 (2006) (clarifying limits of the probate exception to federal jurisdiction)
  • Dunn v. Menassen, 913 S.W.2d 621 (Tex. App. 1995) (state court retained jurisdiction over claim after related bankruptcy concluded)
  • Fuqua v. Graber, 158 S.W.3d 635 (Tex. App. 2005) (state malicious-prosecution claim not preempted by prior bankruptcy where claim accrued after discharge)
  • Gonzales v. Parks, 830 F.2d 1033 (9th Cir. 1987) (federal courts, not state courts, generally determine incentives and penalties related to bankruptcy)
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: Michael R. Pilkington v. Karen A. Pilkington
Court Name: Indiana Court of Appeals
Date Published: Mar 2, 2017
Citation: 2017 Ind. App. LEXIS 95
Docket Number: Court of Appeals Case 18A02-1605-PL-1086
Court Abbreviation: Ind. Ct. App.