Statute of limitations for suing estate is equitably tolled where beneficiary had no reason to think will was invalid

Law Reporter, Mar 2003

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE

Carpontier v. Roberson, 126 Cal. Rptr. 2d 238 (Ct. App. 2002).

A California appellate court held that a beneficiary of a will who had no reason to believe the will was invalid should be allowed to sue the estate even though the statute of limitations for filing such a suit had run out.

Here, Roberson had allegedly agreed to provide lifetime support for his companion, Carpontier, and had executed a purported will to accomplish this result. After his death his mother successfully contested the will. Carpontier filed a complaint against the estate alleging breach of an oral contract to make a will providing for her support. Roberson's mother sought dismissal, citing the one-year statute of limitations for claims against estates, which had already lapsed.

The trial court dismissed the claim.

Reversing, the appellate court noted that the statute of limitations applies to a claim against a person that survives the person's death. Since Roberson did not breach any promise or agreement during his lifetime, no liability arose and no action could have been brought against him that could survive his death.

The record in this case supports the application of the doctrine of equitable tolling, the court decided. Plaintiff possessed what appeared to be a valid will appointing her executor and leaving her everything. She proceeded in a timely fashion to probate the will, thus pursuing the legal remedy that would most readily address and resolve her entitlement to the property. Notice was published and served upon defendant, indicating the nature of plaintiff's claims. The court reasoned that since plaintiff acted reasonably and in good faith in pursuing first the probate of the will and then this action, equity favors tolling the limitations period.

Plaintiffs Counsel

*William K Wilburn, Saratoga, Cal.