Estate of Connolly

2025 ND 33
CourtNorth Dakota Supreme Court
DecidedFebruary 13, 2025
DocketNo. 20240230
StatusPublished

This text of 2025 ND 33 (Estate of Connolly) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering North Dakota Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Estate of Connolly, 2025 ND 33 (N.D. 2025).

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2025 ND 33

In the Matter of the Estate of Frances Connolly a/k/a Francis Connolly, Deceased

Shawn M. Connolly, Personal Representative, Petitioner and Appellee v. Shireen F. Ducheneaux, Brian B. Connolly, Michael D. Connolly, Stephanie A. Langford, Kelly B. Blindauer, Brianna R. Connolly, and James G. Connolly Respondents and Appellants and Kathleen B. Zahl, Kenneth P. Connolly, and Phillip P. Connolly, Respondents and Leighann N. Barton Claimant

No. 20240230

Appeal from the District Court of McKenzie County, Northwest Judicial District, the Honorable Daniel S. El-Dweek, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Ariston E. Johnson, Watford City, ND, for petitioner and appellee.

Asa K. Burck, Fargo, ND, for respondents and appellants. Estate of Connolly No. 20240230

[¶1] Shireen Ducheneaux, Brian Connolly, Michael Connolly, Stephanie Langford, Kelly Blindauer, Brianna Connolly, and James Connolly (collectively, “Appellants”) appeal from a district court’s judgment entered after a bench trial. On appeal, Appellants argue the court’s findings that Frances Connolly had sufficient testamentary capacity to prepare and execute her will and that Shawn Connolly did not unduly influence Frances Connolly into executing her will are clearly erroneous. They also argue the court abused its discretion by excluding bank statements and other financial documents during trial. After reviewing the record, we conclude the court’s findings that Frances Connolly had the requisite testamentary capacity to execute her will and that Shawn Connolly did not unduly influence Frances Connolly into executing her will are not clearly erroneous, and the court did not abuse its discretion in excluding evidence at trial. We summarily affirm the court’s judgment under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

[¶2] Jon J. Jensen, C.J. Daniel J. Crothers Lisa Fair McEvers Jerod E. Tufte Douglas A. Bahr

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2025 ND 33, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/estate-of-connolly-nd-2025.