Estate of Scott, Matter of, s. 68539
| Decision Date | 19 November 1996 |
| Docket Number | Nos. 68539,68540 and 68755,s. 68539 |
| Citation | 932 S.W.2d 413 |
| Parties | In re the Matter of the ESTATE OF Wilmot Harry SCOTT, deceased. . Application to Transfer Denied |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Edward M. Roth, Leritz, Plunkert & Bruning, St. Louis, for Abigail Scott and Marguerite Scott.
Klutho, Cody & Kilo, P.C., Robert E. Trame, St. Louis, for Michael Flynn.
Before PUDLOWSKI, P.J., and SIMON and HOFF, JJ.
Abigail and Marguerite Scott appeal two judgments entered by the trial court allowing claims of Joel Case and Michael Flynn against the estate of Wilmot Scott for fees resulting from services as guardians and conservators. Michael Flynn appeals the judgment regarding the amount of fees awarded. Judgments reversed, claims denied.
The underlying case, before this Court as Scott v. Scott, 882 S.W.2d 295 (Mo.App.1994), 1 gives the background of this matter. In Scott I, Stephen and David Scott, Wilmot Scott's sons, filed a petition for appointment of guardian and conservator of their father and his estate. Id. at 296. At the same time, the sons filed a petition for preliminary and permanent injunction to restrain Abigail and Marguerite Scott, Wilmot Scott's wife and daughter, from exercising powers pursuant to a durable power of attorney executed by Wilmot Scott in 1988. Id.
The trial court appointed Joel Case guardian and conservator ad litem to represent Wilmot Scott's interests at the competency hearing pursuant to § 475.075.3 RSMo 1986. After a hearing, the trial court found Wilmot Scott to be incapacitated. Scott, 882 S.W.2d at 296. The trial court terminated the 1988 power of attorney and appointed Michael Flynn as guardian and conservator. Id.
Wife and daughter appealed the orders of the trial court in Scott I. This Court reversed the trial court pursuant to § 475.075.2 RSMo 1986, because it found Wilmot Scott was never personally served with the petition for appointment of guardian and conservator. Scott, 882 S.W.2d at 296. This Court found the trial court had no jurisdiction to enter any order concerning Wilmot Scott, and all orders concerning him were void. Id. at 298.
While the appeal was pending, Wilmot Scott died. Id. at 296 n. 1. Thereafter, Case filed a claim in the amount of $11,145.60 against Wilmot Scott's estate for his services as guardian and conservator ad litem. Flynn also filed a claim in the amount of $30,941.50 for his services as guardian and conservator.
Wife and daughter moved to dismiss the claims of Case and Flynn. The trial court entered judgments allowing Case's claim in the amount of $11,145.60 and Flynn's claim in the amount of $18,000.00 against the estate. These appeals followed.
On appeal, wife and daughter challenge the judgments of the trial court which allowed Case and Flynn's claims against Wilmot Scott's estate. Flynn appeals regarding the amount of fees awarded.
Wife and daughter contend that because the appointments of Case and Flynn as guardians and conservators were found in Scott I to be nullities and void from inception, their fees are unrecoverable from decedent's estate. Wife and daughter argue that no claims for fees resulting from the void guardianship/conservatorship order can be allowed because the trial court had no jurisdiction. This Court agrees.
Where an order appointing a guardian ad litem is rendered void for want of jurisdiction, the order allowing fees and costs for services of the guardian ad litem is also void. In re Estate of Dothage, 727 S.W.2d 925, 928 (Mo.App.1987).
This Court has determined the orders appointing Case and Flynn as guardians and conservators are void. Scott, 882 S.W.2d at 298. "A judgment which is void on the face of the record is entitled to no respect, and may be impeached at any time in any proceeding in which it is sought to be enforced or in which its validity is questioned by anyone with whose rights or interest it conflicts." Caby v. Caby, 825 S.W.2d 56, 58 (Mo.App.1992). Therefore, the judgments entered allowing the claims of Case and Flynn against the estate of Wilmot Scott for their services as guardians and conservators are also void.
Flynn argues recovery is proper under a separate theory. He argues that because he and Case acted in good faith as guardians and conservators, they are entitled to payment by decedent's estate under the theory of quantum meruit. Under the theory of quantum meruit, the law presumes a promise to pay for valuable services...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Flynn v. Scott, 72965
...again reversed, holding that the judgment allowing guardian's claim was void for lack of jurisdiction. In re the Matter of the Estate of Scott, 932 S.W.2d 413 (Mo.App.1996) ("Scott II "). Guardian thereafter filed a motion to reopen the guardianship proceeding in order to tax his fees as co......