Representative Litigation

NOTE: Due to the COVID pandemic, the courts have held very few trials in the previous two years.

January, 2020: Multnomah County Circuit Court
The firm represented the brother and sister of decedent, who had changed the beneficiary designations on his IRAs from his estranged wife to them. After his death, wife commenced a lawsuit contending that decedent had been unduly influenced by his brother and sister, and alternatively that he lacked the legal capacity to make the change. Wife also contended that brother and sister had tortiously interfered with her inheritance. After a five-day trial, the jury found in favor of the brother and sister on the tortious interference claim, and the trial court ruled in their favor on the lack of capacity and undue influence claims.

January, 2019: Washington County Circuit Court
Husband executed a trust and named himself and his wife as co-trustees. The primary asset of the trust was their residence in which wife held a life estate. The trust provided that wife should receive all of the income of the trust, and whatever amount of principal was necessary to maintain her historical standard of living. Husband had four children by a prior marriage who were remainder beneficiaries of the trust after wife died. Husband died, and one of his children became co-trustee with wife. The children, including the co-trustee, made claims against wife for waste to the property, injury to their inheritance, conversion of certain financial accounts, and breaches of her fiduciary duty as co-trustee. The trial court dismissed the substantive claims against wife, appointed a third-party fiduciary to serve as sole trustee, and awarded attorney fees to wife.

July, 2019: Multnomah County Circuit Court
Shortly before he died, decedent signed a handwritten document in which he disposed of his estate. However, the writing was not witnessed by two attesting witnesses. After he died, decedent’s surviving spouse offered the writing to be admitted to probate as his valid last will. Decedent’s daughter by a prior marriage objected and challenged the validity of the writing as constituting a valid last will. However, the legislature had recently enacted ORS 112.238, which allows the probate court to admit a writing, even if not executed in accordance with the usual formalities, as a valid last will if the proponent establishes by clear and convincing evidence that the decedent had intended it to be his last will. After trial the probate court found that decedent had intended the writing to be his last will, overruled the objections filed by his daughter, admitted the writing to probate, and appointed decedent’s wife to serve as his personal representative.

June 2018: Coos County Circuit Court
Husband and wife married after the deaths of their respective spouses. They each had children by their prior marriages. They signed a prenuptial agreement before their marriage in which each waived their statutory right of their elective shares against the other’s estate. Wife died, and husband thereafter filed a claim against her estate of his statutory elective share contending that the prenuptial agreement which barred his claim should be invalidated as being unconscionable and unenforceable. Husband died while the matter was pending, and his personal representative continued the lawsuit. Wife’s children, as co-trustees of her trust, objected. After several days’ trial, the court found that the prenuptial agreement was fully and fairly executed, that it was not unconscionable, that it was voluntarily entered into by husband and wife, and dismissed the petition for enforcement of the elective share.

June 2017: Multnomah County Circuit Court
Decedent died holding legal title to a residence which had been occupied for many years by a woman who was decedent’s friend and her husband. After decedent passed away, woman commenced an action seeking to have the trial court declare that she and her husband were the actual owners of the residence, having paid for it through the years in accordance with an unrecorded real estate contract. The trial court found that the unrecorded real estate contract was a forgery, found that the woman and her husband had manufactured false and misleading evidence, and made credibility findings against them. Their claim was dismissed, and the trial court declared the property to be owned by decedent and subject to the administration of his estate.

Note: Feburary 2019: Woman and husband appealed. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s decision and dismissed the appeal.