For summaries from opinions prior to August, 2018, view PDF versions here.
In the Matter of the Estate of LaVerne E. Workman, Deceased
Dennis Workman, Plaintiff-Appellant
Gary Workman, Defendant-Appellee
Attorney for Appellant
Bruce E. Johnson
Attorney for Appellee
Daniel P. Kresowik
Court of Appeals
Court of Appeals Opinion
Opinion Number:
Date Published:
Summary
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, Thomas G. Reidel, Judge. AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART. Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Potterfield and Tabor, JJ. Per Curiam. Separate Writing by Potterfield, J. Partial Dissent by Vaitheswaran, P.J. (8 pages)
Dennis Workman appeals, contending the district court should not have enforced the “no-contest” provision because he acted with probable cause and in good faith in filing his will-contest action. OPINION HOLDS: While we affirm the revocation of Dennis’ interest, we reverse as to Dennis' son. SEPARATE WRITING STATES: I agree with the majority that Dennis’s interest in his father’s will should be revoked, as he failed to establish good faith and probable cause for filing the will-contest action relating to his father’s will; I write separately to explain why I take a different position on this issue in this action than I did in In re Estate of Workman, No. 16-0908, 2017 WL 706342, at *7 (Iowa Ct. App. Feb. 22, 2017). DISSENT ASSERTS: I concur in affirmance of the revocation of Dennis’ shares and interest in LaVerne’s estate but I respectfully dissent from the majority’s conclusion that Dennis’ minor son is entitled to receive his bequest.
