Norvell v. Norvell

Summary

The Alabama Supreme Court reviewed a summary judgment arising from a dispute over an elderly mother's sale of lakefront property to one of her sons under a power of attorney. The court affirmed the judgment on the claims for intentional interference with inheritance expectancy and undue influence because the appellant waived challenges to the asserted ripeness ground. It reversed and remanded as to the declaratory-judgment, breach-of-fiduciary-duty, and conspiracy claims, holding that the alleged defect concerned real-party-in-interest or cause-of-action issues rather than standing.

Holdings

1. When a trial court does not specify the basis for summary judgment and the appellant fails to challenge an asserted alternative ground supporting the judgment, the appellant waives any argument concerning that ground, and the judgment must be affirmed on the affected claims.
2. A defendant's contention that a plaintiff is asserting another person's rights generally presents a real-party-in-interest or cause-of-action issue, not a standing issue, in a private-law action. Such an alleged defect does not by itself deprive the trial court of subject-matter jurisdiction.
3. Summary judgment was improper on William's declaratory-judgment, breach-of-fiduciary-duty, and conspiracy claims because the defendants failed to establish their asserted standing ground as a matter of law.
4. Under Ala. Code § 6-5-440, a second-filed action cannot serve as a defense in abatement to an earlier-filed action.
5. The filing of a probate-court petition seeking appointment of a conservator did not divest the circuit court of jurisdiction over William's declaratory-judgment claim concerning alleged misconduct under the power of attorney.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the circuit court properly entered summary judgment on William's intentional-interference-with-inheritance-expectancy and undue-influence claims when William failed to challenge on appeal the asserted ground that those claims were premature or unripe.
2. Whether William's claims for declaratory relief, breach of fiduciary duty, and conspiracy were subject to summary judgment for lack of standing in a private-law action.
3. Whether the subsequently filed probate-court proceeding required abatement of the earlier-filed circuit-court action under Ala. Code § 6-5-440.
4. Whether filing a petition for conservatorship relief in the probate court divested the circuit court of jurisdiction over William's declaratory-judgment claim concerning the power of attorney.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded