Jacques v. Martin ( 2021 )

VERMONT SUPERIOR COURT CIVIL DIVISION
Washington Unit Case No. 21-CV-01156
65 State Street
Montpelier VT 05602
802-828-2091
www.vermontjudiciary.org
Sondra Jacques v. Polly Martin
ENTRY REGARDING MOTION
Title: Motion to Dismiss Appellee's Motion to Dismiss or Alternatively, Motion to Stay
Appeal (Motion: 1)
Filer:
Filed Date: May 13, 2021
Entry regarding Motion to Dismiss
Ms. Sondra Jacques filed this appeal after the probate court disallowed the 2016 will of
decedent Perley Briggs that she had offered for probate. Mr. Briggs’ daughter, Polly Martin, and
children (collectively, Descendants) contested the 2016 will and offered a competing 2009 will.
Following a hearing on the merits focused on the 2016 will only, the probate court disallowed the 2016
will as the product of undue influence by Ms. Jacques, who promptly appealed. The probate court has
not determined the status of the 2009 will. Descendants have filed a motion to dismiss arguing that this
appeal is premature as the probate proceeding has not yet arrived at a final judgment. In the
alternative, they request that this appeal be stayed so that the probate court can appoint an
administrator to preserve the estate’s principal nonliquid asset, a farmhouse property allegedly
suffering waste.
As the Vermont Supreme Court recently explained, “Vermont has no statute or rule defining
what specific types of probate orders are final and appealable. A review of our decisions in this area
reveals that we have frequently treated probate orders as final even where they did not dispose of the
entire probate proceeding.” In re Trustees of Marjorie T. Palmer Tr., 2018 VT 134, ¶ 30, 209 Vt. 192.
“[P]robate proceedings are frequently lengthy and involve a series of decisions on discrete issues that
may be appropriate for immediate review.” Id. Here, the probate court’s decision finally and
conclusively resolved the issue of whether the 2016 will would be admitted into probate. That decision
finally determines the parties’ rights under the 2016 will and therefore was appealable. See, e.g., In re
Perkins' Est., 66 P.2d 420, 421 (Kan. 1937) (“An order refusing to admit [a will to] probate has been held
to be a final and appealable order.”); In re Est. of Prunty, 99 N.E.3d 614, 618 (Ill. Ct. App. 2018) (“An
Entry Regarding Motion Page 1 of 2
21-CV-01156 Sondra Jacques v. Polly Martin
order admitting or refusing to admit a will to probate, appointing or removing an executor, or allowing
or disallowing a claim against an estate is a final order.”).
The basis for Descendants’ alternative request, to stay this case so the probate court can
appoint an administrator to avoid waste of the farmhouse property, is unclear to the court. On
September 29, 2020, the probate court issued letters of special administration appointing John Page,
Esq., special administrator with “authority to investigate, identify, collect, and preserve the estate of the
deceased.” As a general matter, administrators are charged with the duty to maintain “in tenantable
repair the houses, buildings, and fences belonging to the estate.” 14 V.S.A. § 929. Special
administrators are appointed to protect the estate when there is a delay, as in a will contest case such
as this, in appointing an executor or administrator.
Descendants’ motion to dismiss is denied.
Electronically signed on 6/10/2021 2:34 PM, pursuant to V.R.E.F. 9(d)
Entry Regarding Motion Page 2 of 2
21-CV-01156 Sondra Jacques v. Polly Martin