The Finality of Orders in Unsupervised Probate Proceedings: A Recent Argument by Eric Schlimgen Before the South Dakota Supreme Court in Arlene Ager v. Linda Ager Coyle #30645

Background of the Case

The case involves a dispute between Arlene Ager and her daughter in law, Linda Ager Coyle, along with William Coyle, regarding the estate of Fred Ager, who is now deceased. Linda Ager Coyle, acting as the power of attorney for Fred Ager before his death, and William Coyle, also acting as power of attorney, are accused of mismanaging the estate. A hearing was held before the Circuit Court, Honorable Judge Fitzgerald and that Court ruled the Petition to Remove Personal Representative and Self-Dealing was denied. That ruling was appealed to the South Dakota Supreme Court but dismissed as Arlene failed to include all interested parties in its appeal. See In re Est. of Geier, 2012 S.D. 2, ¶ 17, 809 N.W.2d 355, 360 (quoting In re Reese Trust, 2009 S.D. 111, ¶ 14, 776 N.W.2d 832, 836) (“Failure to serve a notice of appeal on a party before the time for taking an appeal has expired is fatal to the appeal and requires its dismissal.”). Arlene Ager contests the actions taken by her daughter-in-law and son-in-law, leading to a complex legal battle.

The Argument on Finality

Schlimgen, representing the appellee (in this case, the party who won on the lower court level, then responding to the appeal), presented a compelling argument focused on the finality of orders in an unsupervised probate proceeding. Especially when the lower circuit court fully litigated the issue with testimony and evidence, issued a decision, then that decision was appealed to the South Dakota Supreme Court but dismissed due to an unperfected appeal. That party as Schlimgen argues does not then have the ability to re-raise the same issues in a separate lawsuit asking for the same relief the underlying court already denied; that is barred by the doctrine of res judicata.

Conclusion

Schlimgen's recent argument in Arlene Ager v. Linda Ager Coyle highlights a critical issue in probate law—the finality of orders in unsupervised proceedings. The South Dakota Supreme Court Geier and Smeenk II decisions serve as precedent but undoubtably, this decision will result in new caselaw, particularly in terms of when an order is considered final and binding. For those involved in probate disputes, this case serves as a reminder of the importance of understanding the legal processes and the potential complexities that can arise even in seemingly straightforward cases.

UPDATE: The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court granting the relief sought!

#OralAdvocacy #mootcourt #SupremeCourt #southdakotasupremecourt #Appellatecourt #Appeal #probatelaw #lawyer