Nelson v. Nelson: Quitclaim Deed Dispute in North Dakota Supreme Court, Lecture notes of Judicial Systems

Download Nelson v. Nelson: Quitclaim Deed Dispute in North Dakota Supreme Court and more Lecture notes Judicial Systems in PDF only on Docsity! Filed 6/8/20 by Clerk of Supreme Court IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA 2020 ND 130 Steven J. Nelson, and Gail Nelson-Hom, Plaintiffs and Appellees v. William L. Nelson, Defendant and Appellant No. 20190347 Appeal from the District Court of Burleigh County, South Central Judicial District, the Honorable Thomas J. Schneider, Judge. DISMISSED IN PART AND AFFIRMED. Opinion of the Court by McEvers, Justice. Micheal A. Mulloy, Bismarck, ND, for plaintiffs and appellees. Theresa L. Kellington, Bismarck, ND, for defendant and appellant. 1 Nelson v. Nelson No. 20190347 McEvers, Justice. [¶1] William Nelson appeals from a district court judgment denying his claims relating to a quitclaim deed executed by his mother Elsie Haykel before her death. We dismiss a part of Nelson’s appeal and affirm the judgment. I [¶2] In 2011, at eighty-nine years old, Elsie Haykel executed estate planning documents and a quitclaim deed conveying a remainder interest in a Bismarck condominium to her children, Steven Nelson, Gail Nelson-Hom, and William Nelson. Haykel died in 2014. [¶3] In January 2016, Steven Nelson and Nelson-Hom sued William Nelson seeking a partition and sale of the condominium. William Nelson counterclaimed, alleging the 2011 quitclaim deed was invalid because Haykel lacked mental capacity and was unduly influenced. The district court entered partial summary judgment in favor of Steven Nelson and Nelson-Hom and this Court reversed and remanded, concluding William Nelson raised genuine issues of material fact on his claims of lack of capacity and undue influence. Nelson v. Nelson, 2018 ND 212, ¶¶ 9, 29, 917 N.W.2d 479. [¶4] After a two-day trial in July and August 2019, the district court entered a judgment concluding the quitclaim deed was valid because Haykel did not lack mental capacity to execute the deed and was not unduly influenced. The judgment also awarded Steven Nelson and Gail Nelson-Hom $6,133.88 in attorney’s fees and costs, granted Steven Nelson authority to sell the condominium, and denied William Nelson’s discovery claims and his motion to stay the proceedings to reopen Haykel’s probate. II [¶5] William Nelson raises twenty-one issues on appeal. In summary, he argues: (1) the district court erred in finding Haykel had the mental capacity to execute the quitclaim deed and was not unduly influenced; (2) the court