Behle v. Harr
- Henry H. Behle IV, Plaintiff and Appellant
Darren Harr as Personal Representative
of the Estate of Henry L. Behle, Defendant and Appellee
- Case Type
- CIVIL APPEAL : OTHER (Civil)
- Appeal From
Case No. 2020-CV-00016
Southeast Judicial District, LaMoure County
Daniel D. Narum
Parties' Statement of Issues
1. Must all matters concerning equitable relief and complete justice be resolved before the district court grants summary judgment dismissing all claims?
2. Can the district court resolve disputed material facts in favor of the moving party to justify granting summary judgment dismissing the opposing party’s case?
3. If disputes and demands related to ownership of real and personal property by an estate are not considered probate claims under NDCC § 30.1-01-06(7) are the presentation of those demands and disputes barred by the strict time limitations contained in the probate nonclaim statute, NDCC § 30.1-19-3(2)?
4. Do the wrongful acts performed during a decedent’s life, that give rise to a cause of action, become barred by the probate nonclaim statute because the wrongful acts were not discovered until after his death?
5. Does part performance of an oral contract for the sale of land, by conveyance of an executed and accepted deed for the real property, remove the oral contract from the statute of frauds?
6. Is an action brought in law or equity to enforce a contract for the transfer of real property the enforcement of a contract to make a will?
7. Do claims based on promissory estoppel, fraud, deceit or unjust enrichment accrue when the wrongful act is committed or when the perpetrator of the wrongful act dies?
1. Whether the district court erred as a matter of law by dismissing Behle IV’s claims as untimely when Behle IV failed to file the claims within the three-month window mandated by North Dakota’s nonclaim statute.
2. Whether the district court erred as a matter of law by dismissing Behle IV’s inheritance claims when there was no writing signed by the decedent evidencing the contract to devise property, as mandated by N.D.C.C. § 30.1-09-13, and any purported promise failed to satisfy North Dakota’s requirements for a testamentary devise.
3. Whether the district court erred as a matter of law in concluding Behle IV’s claims do not satisfy the statute of frauds when there was no writing evidencing the contract and the only writings that exist contradicted the claims.
4. Whether the district court erred as a matter of law by dismissing Behle IV’s equitable claims when Behle IV did not provide competent evidence or argument supporting each element of the claims.
5. Whether the district court properly dismissed Behle IV’s claim for conversion of family photographs when Behle IV admitted he acquiesced in the decedent’s possession of the photographs and failed to allege a claim until the statute of limitations expired.
Henry H. Behle IV appeals after the district court granted summary judgment in favor of Darren Harr as the personal representative of the Estate of Henry L. Behle.
Henry H. Behle filed claims against the Estate concerning two parcels of real estate and various personal property. Harr disallowed the claims. Behle initiated this civil action bringing claims for breach of contract, promissory estopple, fraud, deceit, unjust enrichment, and conversion.
On appeal, Behle argues the district court erred when it held his claims were untimely because they were not filed within three months of the decedent’s death as required by N.D.C.C. § 30.1-19-03(2)(b). Behle also argues the district court erred when it alternatively held his claims failed due to the absence of a writing. Behle asserts there are factual issues that preclude summary judgment.
(Note: Attachments may not be available for recently filed cases and/or confidential documents.)
|Seq. #||Filing Date||Description||Attachment|
|1||02/22/2021||NOTICE OF APPEAL : 02/22/2021|
|2||02/23/2021||Rec'd $125 Filing Fee|
|3||02/23/2021||NOT. OF FILING NOT. OF APPEAL AND PROOF OF SERV.|
|4||02/23/2021||Notice Served on Alan Baker, Kevin J. Kercher & Andrew D. Cook|
|5||03/01/2021||MOTION FOR REMAND (SUA SPONTE)|
|6||03/01/2021||ACTION BY CHIEF JUSTICE (SUA SPONTE) - Granted|
|7||03/01/2021||ORDER OF REMAND|
|8||03/01/2021||BRIEFING SCHEDULE STAYED|
|9||03/01/2021||Order/Judgment Sent to Parties|
|10||04/20/2021||ELEC. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED APRIL 19, 2021 (ENTRY NOS.1-63)|
|11||04/21/2021||MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLANT BRIEF - RESET DUE TO REMAND (SUA SPONTE)|
|12||04/21/2021||ACTION BY CLERK - RESET DUE TO REMAND (SUA SPONTE) - Granted : 05/21/2021|
|13||04/26/2021||ELEC. SUPP. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED APRIL 23, 2021 (ENTRY NOS.64-66 )|
|15||05/21/2021||Oral Argument Request by Appellant|
|17||05/24/2021||Rec'd $149.00 for Additional pages in Appendix (receipt #28144)|
|18||06/01/2021||MOT. EXT/TIME TO FILE CORRECTIONS TO APPELLANT BRIEF AND APPENDIX|
|19||06/02/2021||Response Filed to MOT. EXT/TIME TO FILE CORRECTIONS TO APPELLANT BRIEF AND APPENDIX|
|20||06/02/2021||ACTION BY CLERK (granted in part) - Granted|
|21||06/02/2021||If motion to correct record is granted by dist. ct., no changes to Appellant's brief and appendix;|
|22||06/02/2021||if motion denied in whole or in part, 10 days after entry of the order to file corrections|
|23||06/16/2021||Rec'd District Court's Order on Motion to Correct Record (Granted)|
|24||06/16/2021||MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLEE BRIEF (Sua Sponte due to order correcting record)|
|25||06/16/2021||ACTION BY CHIEF DEPUTY CLERK (Sua Sponte due to order correcting record) - Granted : 07/14/2021|
|26||06/17/2021||Rec'd 4 copies of ATA back from CD|
|27||06/21/2021||Rec'd 4 copies of ATB back from CD|
|28||06/25/2021||ELEC. SUPP. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED JUNE 24, 2021 (ENTRY NOS. 67-101 )|
|30||07/09/2021||Oral Argument Request by Appellee|
|32||07/12/2021||Rec'd 4 copies of AEB and AEA back from CD|
|34||07/27/2021||Rec'd 4 copies RYB back from CD|
|35||08/05/2021||NOTICE OF ORAL ARGUMENT SENT|