Polly Sue Pickens v. Murl Louise Tribble and Janet Pearl Sargent

Summary

The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed the denial of Polly Sue Pickens’s motion for a new trial following a jury verdict concerning her handling of her deceased mother’s assets and estate. The court held that Pickens waived her statute-of-limitations defense by failing to submit it to the jury and upheld the circuit court’s determination that a fiduciary relationship existed between Pickens and her mother during the relevant period. The jury had awarded $94,124 to be paid into the estate based on findings including breach of fiduciary duty, conversion, constructive fraud, actual fraud, and tortious interference with inheritance expectancy.

Holdings

1. Pickens waived the statute-of-limitations defense by failing to submit the issue to the jury through argument or proposed jury instructions. The applicable limitations analysis would otherwise involve factual questions concerning accrual, discovery, fraudulent concealment, and tolling.
2. The circuit court properly determined as a matter of law that a fiduciary or confidential relationship existed between Pickens and her mother beginning no later than June 8, 1988, when the father's estate appraisement was filed, and continuing through the mother's death and Pickens's service as executrix.
3. When parties to a joint bank account with survivorship rights occupy a fiduciary or confidential relationship, a presumption of constructive fraud may arise, and the person benefiting from creation of the account bears the burden of proving that the funds were a bona fide gift.
4. An estate personal representative acts in a fiduciary capacity and must manage estate property for the advantage of interested persons, exercising the highest degree of good faith, ordinary care, and reasonable diligence.
5. The circuit court did not abuse its discretion or otherwise commit reversible error in denying Pickens's motion for a new trial.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Tribble's and Sargent's claims were barred by the statute of limitations or whether the limitations issue was waived by Pickens's failure to submit it to the jury.
2. Whether the circuit court properly determined as a matter of law that a fiduciary or confidential relationship existed between Pickens and her mother before the execution of the powers of attorney.
3. Whether the evidence supported submission to the jury of claims for breach of fiduciary duty, tortious interference with inheritance expectancy, conversion, constructive fraud, and actual fraud.
4. Whether the circuit court abused its discretion or committed reversible error in denying Pickens's motion for a new trial, including on jury-instruction and damages-argument issues.

Disposition

affirmed