T&E Litigation Update: McGeoghean v. McGeoghean
In McGeoghean v. McGeoghean, Case No. 10-P-407, 2011 Mass. App. Unpub. LEXIS 936 (Aug. 3, 2011), a decision issued pursuant to Rule 1:28, the Appeals Court affirmed the superior court's judgment in all respects. The complicated facts of this case are not fully apparent from the decision, but the Court held that the superior court's findings of fact and conclusions of law were not clearly erroneous. Two issues in particular bear noting.
First, the Appeals Court affirmed the superior court's finding that the plaintiff John McGeoghean was entitled to quantum meruit damages in compensation for his actions in reliance on the oral promise of his mother, the decedent, to give him certain property and her interest in a business. The superior court did not specify whether the oral promise was one to make an inter vivos gift or a bequest in her will. Consequently, the Court held that the superior court, in awarding quantum meruit damages, had not impermissibly remade the dispositions in the will. Although a promise to include a bequest in a will is not enforceable under the Statute of Frauds, quantum meruit is an available remedy under these circumstances, and the superior court properly found that the plaintiff had rendered valuable services in reliance on his mother's oral promise.
Second, the defendant argued that the plaintiff is judicially estopped from arguing promissory estoppel (i.e., reliance on the mother's oral promise) because of a "Vaughan" affidavit filed by the mother in the plaintiff's divorce action. In that affidavit, the mother had not mentioned a bequest of the property and her interest in the business to the plaintiff. Because the superior court had not found that the mother's oral promise was one to make a bequest, however, judicial estoppel was not implicated. Moreover, even if the superior court had found that the oral promise was one to make a bequest, the Court held that the superior court would have been within its discretion in not applying judicial estoppel.
Recommended
Day Pitney Litigation Partner Mark Romance and Fiduciary and Probate Litigation Partner Ann Hetherwick "Hether" Cahill were featured in the CityBiz article, "Day Pitney Names Mark Romance and Ann Hetherwick Cahill Chairs of Fiduciary and Probate Litigation Practice Group."
Day Pitney Press Release
Three Day Pitney Private Client Department Partners were selected for inclusion on Boston magazine's Top Lawyers of 2024 list*. The selected attorneys are: Christine N. Fletcher, Partner – Trusts and Estates; Jordana G. Schreiber, Partner – Trusts and Estates; and Tiffany M. Bentley, Partner – Family Law.
Day Pitney Litigation Department Chair Manuel Garcia-Linares was featured in the Daily Business Review article, "Florida Supreme Court Clarifies Qualifications for Court – Appointed Arbitrators." Garcia
Day Pitney Press Release
Day Pitney Miami Partners Melissa A. Rodriguez and Mark A. Romance authored the article "Tradition vs. Technology: Original Paper Wills Are Still Required," for the Daily Business Review.
Day Pitney Litigation Partner Mark Romance co-authored the article, "Tips for Navigating First-Time Trial Preparation," for the ABA Litigation Section Newsletter.
Boston partner Hether Cahill will be a faculty member during the upcoming Massachusetts Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) “Taking Depositions Interactive Workshop 2024,” including presenting specifically on the topic “Using Demonstratives,” on October 18.
Day Pitney Press Release
Day Pitney's Fiduciary and Probate Litigation team in Boston authored several chapters in the 6th edition of Fiduciary Litigation in the Probate Court, published by Massachusetts Continuing Legal Education (MCLE).