Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In re Estate of Inman

Supreme Court of Wyoming

October 20, 2016

IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF WALKER P. INMAN, JR. REVOCABLE TRUST (made irrevocable by death of Trustor) dated January 25, 2005:
v.
WALKER PATTERSON INMAN, III and GEORGIA NOEL INMAN, by and through their Conservator, WYOMING TRUST COMPANY, Appellees (Plaintiffs). DARALEE INMAN, as Personal Representative for the Estate of Walker P. Inman, Jr., deceased; and DARALEE INMAN and BRETT ARMSTRONG, as Trustees of the Walker P. Inman, Jr. Revocable Trust dated January 25, 2005, Appellants (Defendants),

         Appeal from the District Court of Lincoln County The Honorable Joseph B. Bluemel, Judge

          Representing Appellants: Michael D. Allen and James K. Sanderson of Sanderson Law Office, Afton, Wyoming; Mario M. Rampulla of Prehoda, Leonard & Edwards, LLC, Laramie, Wyoming. Argument by Messrs. Allen and Rampulla.

          Representing Appellees: Judith Studer of Schwartz, Bon, Walker & Studer, LLC, Casper, Wyoming; Jacob R. Davis of Grimmer & Associates, PC, Lehi, Utah. Argument by Ms. Studer.

          Before HILL, DAVIS, and FOX, JJ, and Waldrip and Campbell, DJJ.

          FOX, Justice.

         [¶1] Daralee Inman appeals an order of the district court that interprets a trust provision and holds that the Wyoming Probate Code governs the transfer of property to the trust, but makes no final determination of either of the two consolidated matters. We lack jurisdiction to decide Daralee Inman's appeal because the order is not a final appealable order, and we therefore dismiss.

         ISSUE

         [¶2] Does this Court have jurisdiction to consider Daralee Inman's appeal, or must we dismiss because the district court's order is not a final appealable order?

         FACTS

         [¶3] Walker P. Inman, Jr. executed an inter vivos trust (Trust) and his Last Will and Testament (Will). Under the terms of the Will, any property or assets in Mr. Inman's estate at his death were to be transferred to the Trust and distributed according to the provisions therein. If the Trust was not in effect at the time of Mr. Inman's death, the provisions of the Will were to control the distributions of his assets. The Will contained a testamentary trust with nearly identical terms as those in the Trust. The beneficiaries under both the Trust and the Will are Daralee Inman (Daralee), Mr. Inman's wife, and his two minor children from a previous marriage.

         [¶4] Mr. Inman died in late February 2010, [1] and Daralee promptly petitioned the district court for probate of Mr. Inman's estate. The district court issued Letters Testamentary to Daralee and appointed her as Personal Representative of the estate. Daralee was also one of three Co-Trustees of the Trust.[2]

         [¶5] Two years after the probate was opened, Wyoming Trust Company (WTC) filed a Voluntary Petition for Appointment of Wyoming Trust Company as the Conservator of the Minor Children in the probate action. WTC argued that the minor children's interests, as beneficiaries of the Trust, were not properly being represented in the probate and it was necessary for WTC to become Conservator to "protect their interests and preserve their rights under the Trust, as well as the Estate." The district court granted WTC's petition.

          [¶6] WTC, as Conservator for the minor children, filed a separate Complaint for Declaratory Relief and Damages, Together with Petition to Remove Trustees, alleging six causes of action: breach of fiduciary duty, failure to account, petition for removal of trustee, indemnity, declaratory judgment for enforcement of trust, and declaratory judgment as to costs and attorney fees. The Trustees filed an answer generally denying all allegations.

         [¶7] Over the next two years the cases proceeded simultaneously, with multiple filings in both matters. At a June 23, 2015 hearing, the district court orally ordered the cases consolidated and required the parties to brief two issues: what Article IV, ¶ 4.1 of the Trust meant, and what In Re Estate of George, 2011 WY 157, 265 P.3d 222 (Wyo. 2011) meant and how it would affect the proceedings. The objective was ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.