The Pennsylvania Supreme Court recently issues a noteworthy decision in the case of In Re: Estate of Krasinski. The case involved the estate of Sophia Krasinski, who passed away in 2006. The primary assets of Krasinski’s estate were three real estate parcels. One of Krasinski’s four children was appointed to act as an executor under the terms of Sophia’s will, which requested that the four children equally split the estate. In 2010, the Executor filed a petition to permit the sale of real estate to heirs, which was subsequently granted by orphans’ court. One of the beneficiaries subsequently sued the estate based on the alleged existence of an oral contract with Sophia Krasinski regarding her estate. Following a nonjury trial, the trial court held that there was no enforceable oral contract and dismissed the case. The beneficiary failed to appeal and a sale occurred.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court was subsequently presented with the opportunity to determine the proper scope of Rule 342(a)(6) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Appellate Procedure, which provides for an appeal as of right from an order that determines an interest in real or personal property. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court, in turn, determined that the beneficiary waived all objections to the court’s order and approved the private sale.
Each year, many estates are divided in a way with which beneficiaries disagree. If you find yourself in this unfortunate situation, one of the most common questions faced is what options you have to remedy the situation.