In Re Guardianship & Conservatorship of Trobough

Citations: 267 Neb. 661; 676 N.W.2d 364; 2004 Neb. LEXIS 47Docket: S-03-668

Court: Nebraska Supreme Court; March 26, 2004; Nebraska; State Supreme Court

SummaryOriginalCytator Case TreatmentBackward CitatorAnalysis

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil

In the case of In re Guardianship and Conservatorship of Marie J. Trobough, the Nebraska Supreme Court addressed an appeal regarding a conservatorship proceeding. Lori Bain, the appellant and granddaughter of the incapacitated individual Marie J. Trobough, contested the final accounting submitted by Gloria Trobough Clippinger, the appointed guardian and conservator. Bain sought to surcharge Clippinger and relieve her of her conservatorship duties, asserting that Clippinger improperly managed Trobough's valuable personal property, including antiques and dolls, which Bain estimated to be worth over $100,000. 

The Douglas County Court had previously approved Clippinger's final accounting, terminated the conservatorship, and discharged her from duties, while directing that Bain's concerns over personal property be transferred to probate court for further consideration. The appellate court's review focused on whether the county court's decisions conformed to the law, were supported by evidence, and were reasonable. Key facts included Clippinger's initial petition for guardianship due to Trobough's dementia, the annual reports filed by Clippinger, and the auction results of Trobough's property, which indicated a gross sale of over $109,000. The appeal arose after Trobough's death on January 10, 2003, and Bain's subsequent allegations regarding a conflict of interest in the handling of Trobough's property. The case highlights issues of accountability and management of an incapacitated person's estate.

Bain traveled to Tennessee to inventory disputed property and subsequently filed objections to the final accounting, seeking removal and surcharge of conservator Clippinger and appointment of a successor. She alleged that Clippinger improperly transferred personal property to herself without court approval and failed to account for over $80,000 in certificates of deposit. In a supplemental petition, Clippinger included these certificates, now valued over $90,000. A scheduled hearing on May 13, 2003, devolved into discussions on issues arising from concurrent conservatorship and probate proceedings. The court approved the monetary asset accounting, but transferred Bain’s objections regarding personal property to probate court. On May 14, 2003, the county court formally approved the final accounting, discharged Clippinger from her role, and denied Bain's petitions related to Clippinger. Personal property was directed to be transferred to Trobough's estate representative while preserving Bain's issues for probate consideration. Clippinger filed a receipt for assets listed in the final accounting, detailing various valuations of personal property. Bain appealed the May 14 order, asserting multiple errors by the county court, including improperly discharging Clippinger and approving an incomplete final accounting. The appellate analysis indicated that the county court failed to conduct an evidentiary hearing, leading to a decision to vacate the judgment and remand the case for further proceedings. The responsibilities of a conservator are outlined in Neb. Rev. Stat. ch. 30, art. 26, requiring accountability to the county court, which Bain, as an interested party, sought.

The county court failed to hold an evidentiary hearing regarding Bain's petitions in the conservatorship proceedings, which prevented the court from entering orders based on competent evidence. The appellate court reviews these proceedings for legal errors, focusing on whether decisions align with the law and are supported by valid evidence. The county court's actions were deemed erroneous as it did not resolve disputed issues or conduct necessary hearings. During a March 7, 2003, proceeding, Bain's counsel sought clarification on how to contest a transfer of personal property by Clippinger, to which the court indicated objections could be made but planned to close the conservatorship. Subsequent hearings involved dialogues about the final accounting and the transfer of assets, with acknowledgment of disputes over personal property. The court decided to approve the accounting of monetary assets but referred disagreements regarding specific personal items to probate proceedings before terminating the conservatorship and awarding attorney fees to Clippinger. Bain preserved her objection regarding the improper transfer of property, but the lack of an evidentiary hearing by the county court precluded a substantive review of this issue.

Conservatorship and probate proceedings, while addressing similar issues, function independently. Issues arising from a conservatorship must be resolved within that context, and the county court was obligated to address these matters as requested by Bain. A party contesting a county court's approval of a conservator's final accounting must appeal at that time since such approval constitutes a final order. Each conservator is required to account for their actions upon resignation or removal, with the final accounting adjudicating previously unsettled liabilities to the protected person. Upon the death of the conservatee, the conservator’s authority ends, but they remain liable for past actions and must account for the protected person's assets. The county court incorrectly attempted to transfer the accounting issues to probate proceedings instead of resolving them. Interested parties can request an accounting or object to it, and conservators can be surcharged for breaches of trust. Bain was justified in seeking an accounting, which must occur before a conservator can be discharged; failure to do so would undermine the judicial process and hinder recovery of assets. The county court's May 14, 2003, order is vacated, and the case is remanded for an evidentiary hearing to resolve outstanding matters in the conservatorship proceedings.