X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Click here for the full text of this decision FACTS: Nellie Johnson and Mona Felts brought suit against Linette Felts and Linette’s boyfriend, Stacy Booker, claiming the couple were responsible for the death of Steven Felts, Linette’s husband. Linette was designated as a beneficiary of her husband’s life insurance, retirement and investment policies and accounts. Mary Cudd, guardian of Linette’s daughter, Lynnlee, intervened and asserted the same claims as the rest of the plaintiffs: declaratory judgment, damages for wrongful death, the imposition of a constructive trust on all assets inherited by Linette, and forfeiture of her interest in the life insurance proceeds. Connecticut General Life Insurance Co. intervened and filed an interpleader action for the life insurance proceeds. The trial court entered two summary judgment orders: the first order, dated Sept. 6, 2001, originally granted summary judgment to Linette on all claims brought by Johnson, Felts and Cudd. On Nov. 13, 2001, the first order was modified to set aside the summary judgment against Cudd. However, the second order, dated Aug. 13, 2002, again granted summary judgment to Linette on all claims brought by Cudd. HOLDING: Affirmed in part; reversed and remanded in part. The court first considers whether Johnson, Felts and Cudd preserved error for some of their arguments because the did not object to the legal sufficiency of Linette’s no-evidence motion for summary judgment in their responses. The court confirms that a party can challenge the legal sufficiency of a no-evidence motion for the first time on appeal. The court then considers the sufficiency of Linette’s first summary judgment evidence. The court agrees that her no-evidence motion was insufficient. Such a motion must state the specific elements for which there is no evidence, but Linette did not address any specific elements at all. Summary judgment, either on traditional or no-evidence grounds, on this first motion was thus improper. In her second no-evidence motion, however, Linette identifies and addresses specific elements of the plaintiffs’ claims and states that there is no evidence of causation. This motion was legally sufficient, the court concludes. As for the trial court’s ruling on this second motion, the court notes Linette’s responses to questions by police investigating her husband’s death. She initially said she was not having marital problems, but then she admitted that they had talked about counseling, separation and even divorce. Further evidence showed that Steven had locked Linette out of the house the day before he was killed, and had also just transferred a large sum of money from a joint account into a personal account. Furthermore, there was some evidence that Linette had indeed had at least two extra-marital affairs that Steven knew about, and may have had more. Linette misled police about the presence of guns in her home, and her account of the events leading up to Steven’s death were full of inconsistencies and contradictions. Despite the volumes of evidence produced to show that some wrongful act has been committed, Johnson, Felts and Cudd have not presented “one scintilla of causation evidence.” Everything is based on “mere possibility, speculation, and surmise.” OPINION: Hedges, C.J.; Hedges, C.J., Anderson and Guzman, JJ.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 3 articles* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.