Quantcast

Estates and Trusts

CAROLYN GIBAU, ET AL. v. JOEL FALIK

Torts — Medical malpractice — Judgment notwithstanding the verdict This appeal arises from an order of the Circuit Court of Prince George’s County granting defendant-appellee’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict in a medical malpractice case. The suit was filed ...

Read More »

MICHAEL K. FISHER, ET AL. v. DORIS R. FISHER

Estates and Trusts — Prenuptial agreement — Contract interpretation On December 10, 2012, appellant Michael K. Fisher filed a 36-count pro se complaint against his stepmother, appellee Doris R. Fisher in the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County, claiming he ...

Read More »

MARY JANE WEISER v. MARY H. JEWELL LIVING TRUST, et al.

NOTICE OF APPEAL -- APPELLATE BRIEFS -- Mary Jane Weiser, appellant, is a daughter of the late Mary Helen Jewell (“Helen”). In 2007, Helen established the “Mary H. Jewell Living Trust,” which she amended in 2011. On December 18, 2011, Helen died. Appellant has a younger sister, Betty Bryant, and a younger brother, Edward Jewell, Jr. Appellant and her sister Betty were named the Successor Trustees under the 2007 Trust, with Helen serving as the initial Trustee. Generally speaking, the 2007 Trust directed that, following Helen’s death, the trust property remaining after the payment of final expenses would be divided in thirds and distributed outright to each of Helen’s three children. The 2011 amendment to Helen’s trust had the effect of removing appellant as a Trustee, and substituting her brother Edward as Trustee; additionally, rather than an outright distribution to appellant and her siblings of one-third of the remaining Trust corpus, the 2011 amendment directed that appellant’s one-third share be placed in a trust for her, with Betty and Edward as trustees. Betty and Edward were directed to provide appellant with a monthly stipend of $1,400.00, and the amendment empowered Betty and Edward, in their discretion, to pay appellant additional sums out of the Trust assets. The 2011 Amendment did not change the provision in the 2007 Trust that Betty and Edward be paid their one-third shares of the remaining Trust assets outright.

Read More »

DIANE TURECAMO CAREY v. JOHN J. RYAN, ET AL.

MOTION TO REMOVE PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE -- FAILURE TO FILE BOND ON TIMELY BASIS -- This appeal arises from a judgment of the Circuit Court of Anne Arundel County, the Honorable William C. Mulford, II, presiding, affirming an order of the Orphans’ Court for Anne Arundel County. The Orphans’ Court’s order denied Diane Carey’s motion to hold John J. Ryan, personal representative of the estate of Vincent B. Turecamo—the father of Ms. Carey—in contempt and to remove him as the personal representative of Mr. Turecamo’s estate. Ms. Carey presents twelve issues on appeal but in our view they can be consolidated into one: Did the Circuit Court err in denying Ms. Carey’s motion?

Read More »

VALERIE KLINE, ET AL. v. ESTATE OF WILLIAM E. KNIGHT, ET AL.

CIVIL PROCEDURE -- REQUEST TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT -- TIMELINESS -- This case comes before us for the fourth time following our decision in Kline v. Knight, Sept. Term 1999, No 2238 (filed December 2000) (Knight I), cert. denied, 363 Md. 660 (2001), after remand to the Circuit Court for Prince George’s County, Kline v. Knight, Sept. Term 2001, No. 2647 (filed August 28, 2003) (Knight II), and finally Kline v. Knight, Sept. Term 2006, No. 2791 (filed June 15, 2009) (Knight III). This case originated from a contract dispute that arose between appellants, Valerie Kline and Mary Kellam, and appellees, Estate of Williams Knight, et al., while parties were part of the Flower Road Joint Venture (“the Venture”). Appellants alleged that appellee breached his contractual duty by obtaining a release of his personal guaranty of a note on behalf of the Venture.

Read More »