Procedural Matters At Issue In Will Contest Case

In this case, a father died and left the remainder of his estate (after funeral expenses and costs) equally to his three children.  The will was admitted to probate, and named one of the children as executor. Creditors and beneficiaries were notified.  Months later, the executor filed a separate action in the trial court to have his father’s will set aside.  The executor named his two sisters as defendants in the action. One of the sisters asked the court to remove her brother as executor. The brother did not dispute the request and was removed as executor and replaced by a representative from a local bank (the will named the bank as successor executor). The sisters also filed a motion to dismiss the action to set aside their father’s will, stating that it had been inappropriately filed as a separate civil action, instead of within the probate estate and their brother had failed to name the successor executor as a defendant. The trial court dismissed the action to set aside the will, stating that it was not filed appropriately because state law requires that will challenges (Iowa Code §633.309) must be filed within the later of four months from the date of second publication of notice to the creditors or one month following mailing of notice to the heirs under the will.  In addition, the brother failed to name the successor executor as a party and the trial court refused to join the successor to the suit. 

On appeal, the brother argued that his case to set aside his father’s will had been inappropriately dismissed. The appellate court stated that “all known interested parties… shall be joined” in an action to set aside a will and that, if not named, may be joined by the court (Iowa Code § 633.312).  Though the action to set aside the will was inappropriately filed as a separate civil action, the trial court had a duty to transfer it to the probate docket.  In other words, the court has discretion to correct such mistakes and move forward if the case was filed in the county where the decedent was domiciled. 

The sisters also argued on appeal that even if the case was transferred to the probate docket, there were other procedural irregularities. Namely, the brother failed to join the successor executor in the window of time required by Iowa Code § 633.309. The appellate court was, thus, faced with the question of when an “interested party” (someone who would be affected by the outcome of a will challenge) should be joined in the proceeding under Iowa Code §633.312 and the Iowa Rules of Civil Procedure 1.402(5) (relation-back requirements). The appellate court cited an earlier Iowa Supreme Court case where parties to a will dispute were joined by court order after the statute of limitations had run. The Supreme Court stated that in these cases, the statute of limitations is tolled as to those parties not joined in the suit. Procedurally, it is allowable for additional defendants to be added to a will contest case if the original action was timely-filed. As long as the probate estate is still open, an interested party may be added as a defendant. In this case, the trial court should have ordered the brother to join the successor executor, the action should have been moved to the probate docket, and the action should not have been dismissed. The case was remanded to the trial court. Classon v. Classon, No. 0-184/09-1339, 2010 Iowa App. LEXIS 570 (Iowa Ct. App., Jun. 16, 2010).