Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

attorneyburden of prooffiduciaryfiduciary duty
litigationattorneyequityburden of prooffiduciarydivorcefiduciary duty

Related Cases

McKibbins v. United States, Not Reported in Fed. Supp., 2013 WL 5550124
View Case »
Oxford Systems, Inc. v. CellPro, Inc., 45 F.Supp.2d 1055
View Case »
Liggett v. Young, 877 N.E.2d 178
View Case »
McCoy v. Court of Appeals of Wisconsin, Dist. 1, 486 U.S. 429, 108 S.Ct. 1895, 100 L.Ed.2d 440, 56 USLW 4520
View Case »
Ortiz v. Fibreboard Corp., 527 U.S. 815, 119 S.Ct. 2295, 144 L.Ed.2d 715, 67 USLW 3681, 67 USLW 4632, 43 Fed.R.Serv.3d 691, 99 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4953, 1999 Daily Journal D.A.R. 6383, 1999 CJ C.A.R. 3596, 12 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 491
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

Gallner v. Larson, 291 Neb. 205, 865 N.W.2d 95

Facts

Judy Hoffman, an attorney, died intestate, and her former husband, Michael Gallner, was named personal representative of her estate. Judy had designated her friend and attorney, C. Gregg Larson, as the primary beneficiary on several life insurance policies and a retirement account. Gallner contested these designations, claiming they were improper due to Larson's fiduciary relationship with Judy. The district court found that Judy had the capacity to make these designations and that Larson had not breached any fiduciary duty.

Gallner and Judy were married in 1982 and divorced in 1994. Judy was a resident of Omaha, Nebraska, and an attorney licensed to practice law. She died intestate on December 10, 2007. Gallner was named personal representative of her estate. The present litigation involves Larson, who was a friend of Judy's.

Issue

Did C. Gregg Larson breach his fiduciary duty to Judy Hoffman by accepting beneficiary designations on her life insurance policies and retirement account, and was the admission of a photocopy of a note into evidence erroneous?

Did C. Gregg Larson breach his fiduciary duty to Judy Hoffman by accepting beneficiary designations on her life insurance policies and retirement account, and was the admission of a photocopy of a note into evidence erroneous?

Rule

In a fiduciary relationship, the burden of proof is on the fiduciary to establish the fairness of a transaction. Additionally, the best evidence rule requires the original document to prove the content of a writing unless a duplicate is admissible.

Where a fiduciary or confidential relationship exists between the parties to a transaction, the burden of proof is upon the party holding the fiduciary or confidential relationship to establish the fairness, adequacy, and equity of the transaction.

Analysis

The court determined that Larson met his burden of proving that the gift from Judy was fair, as she was a competent attorney who understood the implications of her actions. The court also found that the admission of the photocopy of the note was appropriate, as there was no genuine question regarding the authenticity of the original.

The court determined that Larson met his burden of proving that the gift from Judy was fair, as she was a competent attorney who understood the implications of her actions.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court affirmed the district court's judgment in favor of Larson, concluding that he did not breach his fiduciary duty and that the evidence supported the validity of the beneficiary designations.

The decision of the district court is affirmed.

Who won?

C. Gregg Larson prevailed in the case because the court found that he did not breach his fiduciary duty and that the beneficiary designations were valid.

C. Gregg Larson prevailed in the case because the court found that he did not breach his fiduciary duty and that the beneficiary designations were valid.

You must be