Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Date: 09-20-2024
Case Style:
In the Matter of the Estate of Paul Arthur Bentley
Case Number: 3AN-17-03290
Judge: Eric A. Aarseth
Court: Superior Court, Third Judicial District, Anchorage Borough, Alaska
Plaintiff's Attorney:
Defendant's Attorney:
Description:
Anchorage, Alaska probate lawyers represented the estate and surviving spouse in a well dispute.
Paul Bentley and Eleanor Haynes first married in 1989 in Washington and divorced a few years later. They did not have children together. After their divorce, they remained in contact. Haynes later remarried, but Bentley did not.
After Haynes divorced her second spouse, she and Bentley became close again. At that time Haynes lived in Washington and Bentley lived in Seward. They began flying to visit each other and vacationed together in Mexico and Hawaii.
Bentley received a kidney transplant, which compromised his immune system and eventually led to skin cancer and other health complications. In May 2017 Bentley and Haynes met with an attorney in Anchorage about drawing up a will for Bentley. Bentley signed the will in August. The will devised some property to Haynes, some property to his brother, and the residuary of the estate to the National Kidney Foundation (NKF). The will nominated Haynes as personal representative and directed the personal representative "to administer [Bentley's] estate in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Probate Code, as codified and amended by the Alaska statutes."
In October 2017 Bentley developed kidney failure. That month Bentley flew to Washington to stay with Haynes while he received treatment. After some complications Bentley was hospitalized in November. Bentley spent three days in the hospital on dialysis, then elected to stop treatment on November 17. That same day
Bentley asked Haynes what she wanted "for Christmas." She responded that she wanted to marry him. The two obtained a marriage license, waited the legally required 48 hours, and then were married by a hospice chaplain on November 20. Bentley died the next day.
* * *
Haynes was appointed as personal representative of Bentley's estate in January 2018. Haynes hired one attorney to represent her in her role as personal representative and another attorney to represent her personally as the surviving spouse and beneficiary. Haynes filed an inventory showing that the total value of Bentley's estate was $1,822,867.
Haynes then filed a notice claiming three statutory allowances[1] and a demand for the elective share payable to a surviving spouse.[2] Haynes also took the position that as an after-married spouse, she was entitled to Bentley's entire estate under the provisions of AS 13.12.301.[3] NKF, the residuary beneficiary of Bentley's estate,
opposed Haynes's petition, arguing that Haynes was not entitled to inherit as an after-married spouse because she did not meet the statutory criteria.
Haynes moved for partial summary judgment on her rights as an after-married spouse. NKF opposed Haynes's motion and cross-moved for summary judgment. NKF argued that Washington law, not Alaska law, governed the issue because Bentley was domiciled in Washington when he died. It argued that under Washington law, Haynes was not entitled to inherit as an after-married spouse.[4] Haynes filed a reply, opposing NKF's choice-of-law argument. She argued that because Bentley's will asserted he was a resident of Alaska and directed his personal
representative to apply Alaska law, Alaska law should apply to determine her rights as an after-married spouse.
* * *
In re Bentley, S-17944 (Alaska Sep 20, 2024)
Outcome: We REVERSE the superior court's order applying Washington law to determine Haynes's recovery as an after-married spouse, VACATE the superior court's attorney's fee award, and REMAND for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments: