 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Nevin v. Union Trust Co.3/12/1999
Reporter of Decisions
Argued: December 1, 1998
This matter is before the Court on report by the Superior Court (Hancock County, Mead, J.) pursuant to M.R. Civ. P. 72(c) to consider whether plaintiffs' claims of negligence, breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty are time barred.
In its rulings on the defendants' motions for a summary judgment, the court determined that:
1. The individual beneficiaries of the estate lacked standing to assert claims against the estate planning law firm; and
2. Claims against all defendants were largely barred by the statutes of limitation, 14 M.R.S.A. §§ 752, 753-A (1980 & Supp. 1998), as accruing more than six years prior to February 1, 1995.
Because there were some issues regarding events occurring after February 1, 1989, the summary judgment did not finally resolve all claims. Accordingly the parties, by agreement, reported the issues to this Court, pursuant to M.R. Civ. P 72(c). As part of the report, the parties stipulated that a ruling by this Court that the plaintiffs' claims arising from acts occurring or alleged to have occurred before February 1, 1989, are barred by the applicable statutes of limitation "will completely and finally dispose of plaintiffs' claims and of any claims of the beneficiaries of the Estate of Jennie Learned, whether occurring or alleged to have occurred before or after February 1, 1989 . . . ." With this stipulation, plaintiffs abandoned claims for any events occurring after February 1, 1989, and assured that consideration of the report on the merits was appropriate.
Because we determine that plaintiffs' claims against Union Trust Company (Union Trust) are not time barred, we vacate the summary judgment order regarding Union Trust. We affirm the judgment regarding the law firm and the individual attorneys.
We review the grant of a summary judgment for errors of law, viewing all the properly presented evidentiary materials in a light most favorable to the party against whom the summary judgment was entered. Denman v. Peoples Heritage Bank, Inc., 1998 ME 12, § 3, 704 A.2d 411, 413. "We undertake an independent review of the record to determine if there is a genuine issue of material fact and if the moving party was entitled to a judgment as a matter of law." Searles v. Trustees of St. Joseph's College, 1997 ME 128, § 4, 695 A.2d 1206, 1208.
Case History
The facts as developed for purposes of the summary judgment may be summarized as follows:
At some time in 1976, Jennie Fassett Learned contracted with Union Trust to manage her assets. The principal assets to be managed were two valuable properties in Blue Hill. In 1985, William Clark, a Union Trust officer, recommended that Learned form a corporation to hold her Blue Hill real estate . The recommended purpose for forming the corporation was to reduce potential estate taxes by transferring real estate to the corporation and then making annual gifts of stock to Learned's four children.
In furtherance of that proposal, Clark introduced Learned to Atherton Fuller, an attorney with the law firm of Hale & Hamlin. After Learned met Fuller, she retained him and his firm to prepare a will, draft a durable power of attorney and form a corporation named the Nevin Corporation (Corporation).
The Corporation was organized with Learned, the sole shareholder, receiving two thousand shares of stock in exchange for her Blue Hill real estate. The durable power of attorney assigned to another Union Trust officer, Robert Boit, all authority to manage Learned's business, corporate and financial affairs - includi
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Maine Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|