Bush's Estate, In re, 44707
| Decision Date | 22 November 1974 |
| Docket Number | No. 44707,44707 |
| Parties | In re ESTATE of Archibald G. BUSH, a.k.a. A. G. Bush, Decedent. H. Clifford LEE, et al., Co-Executors of the Estate of Edyth D. Bush, Deceased, Appellants, v. Herschel S. ARROWOOD and Mary Jane Dickman, as Executors of the Estate ofArchibald G. Bush, Deceased, Respondents, The Bush Foundation, Respondent, Warren Spannaus, Attorney General of the State of Minnesota, Respondent. |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court
1. A judgment entered by the district court pursuant to a stipulation for settlement of an action involving the administration
of a charitable foundation, to which judgment all parties agreed and in which the personal rights of the widow of the testator who bequeathed to the foundation all the residue of his estate, as well as disputes relating to management of the foundation and the administration of the husband's estate, are resolved, is res judicata as to all matters covered by the judgment.
2. A district court in the determination of an appeal from probate court pursuant to Minn.St. 525.72 may grant summary judgment where there are no issues of fact that can be litigated.
Robins, Davis & Lyons and Sidney S. Feinberg, Minneapolis, Carlton, Fields, Ward, Emmanual, Smith & Cutler and Edward C. Adkins and Owen Rice, Jr., Tampa, Fla., Arter & Hadden and Thomas V. Koykka, Cleveland, Ohio, for appellants.
Blomquist, Vitko, Langlais & Neimeyer, Neil P. Convery, St. Paul, for Arrowood and Dickman.
Gray, Plant, Mooty & Anderson and Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Minneapolis, for Bush Foundation.
Warren Spannaus, Atty. Gen., Curtis D. Forslund, Sol. Gen., Richard G. Mark, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., St. Paul, for Spannaus.
Considered and decided by the court en banc.
*
This is an appeal from a judgment entered in the District Court of Ramsey County granting summary judgment to defendants and dismissing an appeal from an interlocutory decree of the Probate Court of Ramsey County declaring that Mrs. Bush's purported renunciation of her husband's will was of no force and effect.
The case is the culmination of much protracted litigation and many legal skirmishes resulting from the probate and settlement of the will of Archibald G. Bush. The facts and legal maneuvers of the interested parties are so involved that it seems best to relate them in considerable detail even at the risk of an unduly lengthy opinion in the hope that the decision we now make may see an end to this protracted and expensive litigation.
The trial court has set forth in detail in his memorandum decision the facts essential to a determination of the issues now before us. We doubt that we could improve upon them. So, we adopt as the facts in this decision that portion of the court's memorandum decision that is relevant to the issues involved. We quote and adopt the following from that decision:
'The will of Archibald G. Bush, made April 21, 1965, designated The Bush Foundation as the residuary beneficiary of his estate, with the limitation that, if it be unable to take 'or if bequests to it be not deductible for Federal estate tax purposes', the residue would go to the A. G. Bush Institute. It further provided that, if neither the Foundation nor the Institute be able to take or 'if bequests to them be not deductible for Federal estate tax purposes', the executors should organize a non-profit corporation to which the residue would go instead.
'Mr. Bush, in his Will, expressly made no provision for his wife, Edyth Bush, because it recited they had 'agreed' that the form of 'testamentary plans' 'set out in this agreement is the most suitable.' Attached to the Will is a 'consent of spouse' of the same date, signed by Edyth Bush, which states that she had read the Will and understood its content that she ratified and consented 'to all dispositions made in it' and that she understood that the law gives her 'a much greater interest' than provided in it.
'Both the Will and the consent were witnessed by persons whom the Court regards to be highly competent lawyers.
They were Walter N. Trenerry, Philip Stringer and David R. Roberts.
'The Court understands from the file that both Mr. and Mrs. Bush had previously contributed to The Bush Foundation. The Will gave no direction as to how The Foundation must be operated. It indicated only that it must be able to take and that the donor's bequests to it be 'deductible for Federal estate tax purposes'. And it suggested the thought that whatever corporation might be formed to take be 'operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, literary or educational purposes, including the encouragement of art'.
'The Will specifically gave Mr. Bush's Florida house to the Foundation along with a proviso that Mrs. Bush could occupy the premises so long as she might wish without charge. Mr. Bush died at Winter Haven, Florida, on January 16, 1966. His estate has been in probate in Ramsey County District Court in Minnesota since early after that. It has been a subject of controversy almost from the beginning of the probate.
'Notwithstanding her consent attached to the Will, Edyth Bush, after Mr. Bush had died, indicated an intention to renounce the Will's provisions. Under date of August 27, 1966, she entered into an agreement of compromise and settlement of that issue with the executors. Her claim as stated in the written agreement was that 'she was not informed of the contents of the said Will, of the extent, nature or character of her husband's estate, of the provisions made for her in the said Will, nor of her statutory rights as the surviving spouse of her said husband'.
'In the compromise agreement, Edyth Bush was to be paid $2,100,000; all the outstanding stock of Bush Management Company was to be sold to her for $250,000; the services of David R. Roberts, and Walter N. Trenerry as counsel for the executors and of H. C. Lee and Philip Stringer as their special counsel would be retained, and a prompt petition would be made to the Ramsey County Probate Court and the County Court of Orange County, Florida, for approval.
'Mrs. Bush in turn agreed in the stipulation of settlement that she had been fully advised by Bernard E. Epton, an attorney of hers in Chicago, of the nature and extent of her husband's estate which would likely exceed $130,000,000, of the provision in the Will giving her a life interest in the Florida home, and of her right under the Minnesota and Florida statutes to renounce her late husband's Will and take half of the estate which would amount to approximately $66,000,000. She further agreed to waive any right to renunciation of the Will and that she confirmed and approved her consent attached to the Will. The instrument stated, in effect, that it had to be approved by the Court to be valid. It was signed by Mrs. Bush and by the executors of the Estate.
'The agreement of compromise was approved by the Probate Court of Ramsey County on August 30, 1966, and by the Orange County, Florida, County Court on September 7, 1966. 1
'It is to be observed that that agreement contained no mention as to how the Foundation must be operated. The Foundation did agree to provide for two classes of directors. It amended its Articles of Incorporation and By-Laws, accordingly, to provide for the two classes of member-directors and, in effect, that all action of the Foundation 'should thereafter be exercised exclusively by a majority vote of each of the two classes of directors on a bicameral basis.' (The appellants' propositions of law and fact on this appeal state that the Foundation and the executors agreed to 'be guided by the wisdom and leadership of Mrs. Bush' and to submit to her all requests for gifts or grants.)
'Subsequently, in June of 1967, petition was made to the Ramsey County Probate Court for partial distribution from the Estate to the Foundation. Mrs. Bush was one of the petitioners; 2 and she stated in the document that she was petitioning as the surviving spouse and sole heir of the decedent, as a legatee under his Last Will and Testament, and as a member, Class B director and Chairman of the Board of Directors of The Bush Foundation. Other petitioners were Clarence J. Bassler, Jr., and H. Clifford Lee, as members and Class B directors of the Foundation, and The Bush Foundation itself. The petition recited that it was filed because the representatives had failed to move expeditiously to close the estate. Attorneys for the petitioners were the firm of Oppenheimer, Hodgson, Brown, Wolff and Leach by Benno F. Wolff, Esquire.
'Supporting that petition was a memorandum in favor of the partial distribution, which was submitted by attorneys Benno F. Wolff, Esquire, and David C. Donnelly, Esquire, and Messrs. Oppenheimer, Hodgson, Brown, Wolff and Leach, all of St. Paul and by Theodore C. Diller, Esquire, and Thomas P. Healy, Esquire, and Messrs. Lord, Bissell & Brook, of Chicago. The memorandum recites in part:
'Referring to a Ramsey County District Court action by the Class B against the Class A directors of the Foundation, the memorandum continued:
The memorandum added:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
League of Women Voters Minn. v. Ritchie
...485 (8th ed.2004) (emphasis added). Judicial dicta are generally given much greater weight than obiter dicta, see Bush v. Arrowood, 302 Minn. 188, 208, 224 N.W.2d 489, 501 (1974), but are not binding, id. The whole process considered in Stearns and Duluth Railway was different from the proc......
-
Ortega-Maldonado v. Allstate Ins. Co., Civ. No. 06-461 (PJS/RLE).
... ... A Summary Judgment constitutes a final determination on the merits. See, In re Estate of Bush, 302 Minn. 188, 224 N.W.2d 489, 503 (1974); DLH Inc. v. Russ, 566 N.W.2d 60, 69 ... ...
-
DLH, Inc. v. Russ, C2-95-1218
... ... entitled to legal ownership of the stock because it purchased the stock from the bankruptcy estate of respondent David Russ. David Russ maintains that he did not own Damark stock when he filed for ... ...
-
Kronzer v. First Nat. Bank of Minneapolis
... ... 305 Minn. 415 ... Raymond KRONZER and Camilla Reiersgord, as Administratrix of ... the Estate of Nellie Kronzer, Decedent, ... Appellants, ... FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF MINNEAPOLIS, Defendant ... ...