In re: Estate of J. Herman Isner

CourtWest Virginia Supreme Court
DecidedDecember 20, 2019
Docket18-0317
StatusPublished

This text of In re: Estate of J. Herman Isner (In re: Estate of J. Herman Isner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering West Virginia Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re: Estate of J. Herman Isner, (W. Va. 2019).

Opinion

STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS FILED In re Estate of J. Herman Isner December 20, 2019 EDYTHE NASH GAISER, CLERK SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS No. 18-0317 (Randolph County 13-C-10) OF WEST VIRGINIA

MEMORANDUM DECISION Petitioner Cleveland Biller, as trustee of the J. Herman Isner Revocable Trust (“revocable trustee”) and trustee of the J. Herman and Doris F. Isner Charitable Trust (“charitable trust”), pro se, appeals the March 22, 2018, order of the Circuit Court of Randolph County granting (1) a motion for clarification of an August 1, 2017, order appointing the attorney R. Mike Mullens (“Attorney Mullens”) as special commissioner; and (2) a motion to compel petitioner to provide an accounting of his actions as trustee.1 Respondents Jefferson Lee Triplett and Patrick A. Nichols, co-executors of the Estate of J. Herman Isner (collectively “estate”), by counsel Joshua S. Rogers, filed a response in support of the circuit court’s order. Petitioner filed a reply.

The Court has considered the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal.2 The facts and legal arguments are adequately presented, and the decisional process would not be significantly aided by oral argument. Upon consideration of the standard of review, the briefs, and the record presented, the Court finds that there is no final, appealable order in this case. For these reasons, a memorandum decision dismissing the appeal for a lack of jurisdiction and remanding the case to the circuit court for further proceedings is appropriate under Rule 21 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure.

J. Herman Isner (“the decedent”) died on May 5, 2012, and left an estate worth approximately $5 million. During his lifetime, the decedent created a number of different trusts to pursue various “charitable endeavors,” including the preservation of his approximately 250 acre farm as an example of West Virginia agriculture. However, the decedent funded only certain trusts, leaving others unfunded and “irrelevant.” Consequently, the estate filed a declaratory judgment

1 We note that the circuit court’s order granting the motions was inadvertently entered onto the record a second time on March 26, 2018. 2 By order entered April 27, 2018, we granted petitioner’s motion to proceed on a designated record. However, petitioner failed to file his designation with the Circuit Clerk of Randolph County by the deadline set forth in our April 27, 2018, order. Pursuant to Rule 6(b) of the West Virginia Rules of Appellate Procedure, we supplement the appellate record to include the circuit court’s August 1, 2017, order appointing Attorney Mullens as special commissioner, Attorney Mullens’s December 12, 2017, motion for clarification of the August 1, 2017, order, and Attorney Mullens’s December 12, 2017, motion to compel petitioner to provide an accounting of his actions as trustee. 1 action to determine the rights, duties, and powers of the trustees and beneficiaries of the several trusts. Petitioner participated in reaching a settlement of the action during a court-ordered mediation on July 2, 2013. The case was continued numerous times while the parties drafted an agreement to implement the settlement.

The settlement agreement provided, in pertinent part, that the terms of the charitable trust would be restated and a new trust document entitled “J. Herman and Doris F. Isner Amended and Restated Charitable Trust” (“restated charitable trust”) would be implemented. The restated charitable trust noted that its purpose was to apply the property and income with which it is endowed “exclusively for charitable, religious, scientific, literary[,] or educational purposes,” such as supporting the decedent’s farm, which is another “nonprofit tax-exempt organization.”

In May of 2015, petitioner fired his attorney. On June 17, 2015, a motion was filed to compel petitioner to execute the parties’ settlement agreement. Following hearings on June 18, 2015, and August 5, 2015, the circuit court entered an order granting the motion to compel petitioner to execute the agreement. Petitioner appealed to this Court, which affirmed the circuit court’s order. See In re Estate of Isner (“Isner I”), No. 15-0904, 2016 WL 5348353, at *4 (W.Va. Sept. 23, 2016) (memorandum decision), cert. denied sub nom. Biller v. Triplett, 137 S.Ct. 1434 (2017).

Despite being compelled by the circuit court, petitioner still refused to execute the settlement agreement. Ultimately, by order entered August 1, 2017, the court appointed Attorney Mullens as special commissioner to execute the agreement. The court further ordered that Attorney Mullens would have authority to ensure that the agreement was effectuated:

The Court finds that, as [petitioner] is sole [t]rustee of the [revocable trust] and [the charitable trust], [Attorney] Mullens as special commissioner shall have full authority with respect to disposition of the funds and other assets of the [revocable trust] consistent with the aforementioned settlement. This includes, without limitation, authority for [Attorney] Mullens as special commissioner to do the following: (1) execute a deed from the [revocable trust] to the J. Herman Isner Trust (a.k.a. [f]arm [t]rust) as provided for in the Nonjudicial Settlement Agreement[;] (2) pay bequests and administrative expenses, including attorney’s fees, of the [estate] with funds from the [revocable trust] as contemplated by Sections 5 and 9 of the Nonjudicial Settlement Agreement[;] and (3) transfer and/or pay assets and funds of the [revocable trust] to Citizens Bank of West Virginia as [t]rustee of the [r]estated [c]haritable [t]rust as the [r]estated [c]haritable [t]rust is the beneficiary of the [revocable trust]. [Attorney] Mullens as special commissioner is authorized and directed to execute any and all other writings that otherwise would have required [petitioner]’s signature and which are needed to effectuate the settlement contemplated by the Nonjudicial Settlement Agreement and the [r]estated [c]haritable [t]rust, including any and all documents that may be needed to accomplish transfers of shares of bank stock, as well as payments and/or transfers from bank accounts, investment accounts, and other assets of the [revocable trust] for payment of [estate] bequests, payment of [estate] administrative expenses, and 2 to transfer and/or pay such assets and funds to Citizens Bank of West Virginia as [t]rustee of the [r]estated [c]haritable [t]rust.

The circuit court further ordered that Attorney Mullens would “have subpoena and investigatory authority in serving in his role as special commissioner for purposes of ascertaining, locating, and transferring funds and other assets of the [revocable trust].” Finally, the court ordered that once Attorney Mullens has completed his services as special commissioner and transferred the assets of the revocable trust to the restated charitable trust, “he shall notify the [c]ourt in writing and this case shall then be removed from the [c]ourt’s active docket.” (emphasis added).3

On December 12, 2017, Attorney Mullens filed two motions. In the first motion, Attorney Mullens stated that two entities that held assets belonging to the revocable trust, Summit Community Bank (“Summit”) and Carlton & Associations (“Carlton”), were reluctant to release the assets to him as special commissioner without clarification of Attorney Mullens’s rights and duties under the August 1, 2017, order. Therefore, Attorney Mullens asked the circuit court to clarify that the August 1, 2017, order provided him with the authority to receive those assets as special commissioner. In the second motion, Attorney Mullens noted that he had investigatory authority under the August 1, 2017, order to locate assets belonging to the revocable trust and stated that petitioner attempted to access the revocable trust’s funds in contravention of the parties’ settlement agreement.

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

Related

James M.B. v. Carolyn M.
456 S.E.2d 16 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1995)
State ex rel. Bluestone Coal Corp. v. Mazzone
697 S.E.2d 740 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 2010)
Biller v. Triplett
137 S. Ct. 1434 (Supreme Court, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
In re: Estate of J. Herman Isner, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-estate-of-j-herman-isner-wva-2019.