Let’s say I accuse Fred Flintstone of embezzling $50k from me (assume for the sake of this thought experiment that he’s single and has no dependents and that he has plenty in the bank) and I sue. Fred keels over dead after opening statements. Am I shit out of luck since Fred can no longer defend himself? Would his lawyer continue to litigate the trial, the jury reaching its conclusions absent his testimony? Would I have to file a separate suit against his estate?
Don’t need answer fast.
If it happens before trial (and it does happen) you just have to amend the complaint to change the name of the defendant from “Flintstone” to “estate of Flintstone.” Not a big deal, but there are some hoops to jump through.
I’ve never seen it happen mid-trial, so I’m only guessing. I think there’d be a mistrial due to the Fred dying after being introduced to the jury but not being able to complete the trial. (and the estate wouldn’t be established fast enough to keep the trial going). You’d probably have to start again in a couple of months.
Won’t the OP’s place in line for monetary payout change even if the cas is won?
I would guess that any award from the civil case would be treated like any other debt of the estate (if any). Dunno how the defendant’s insurance (if, for example, s/he had an umbrella policy) would handle the whole situation. And I don’t know whether the award would take precedence over any other debts.
If the decent had most of his/her assets in a living trust, would those be subject to lawsuits?
Also, presumably, the whole situation would cause significant delays in settling the estate. I know of a situation where person A is deceased, and person B is in the process of filing a lawsuit against the estate; not sure how that will work out. If it gets before a judge for preliminary motions, I would imagine that the judge would order estate assets frozen - lest they be distributed to the heirs. Hard to claw the money back, if that happens.
This is very topical - just in the past few days it was reported that Hewlett Packard would pursue the estate of Mike Lynch for damages.
Hewlett Packard to pursue $4B claim against estate of Mike Lynch | Fox Business
Yes, you can go after the estate- but not the heirs.
I.e. “speak now or forever hold your peace.”
True. You cannot go after the heirs’ personal assets. Same concept as if a family member dies leaving a lot of credit card debt; the creditors can only go after the assets of the deceased, not of family members (ignoring joint accounts and other complications).
Someone in the original scenario needs to get their claims in front of a judge ASAP. If the deceased’s estate gets settled quickly, and money is distributed, it could get pretty messy. I imagine that in theory, if the heirs have received and spent some of the money that is later awarded, the plaintiffs could go after the executor and possibly even the heirs.
Another wrinkle: what if the deceased’s assets are in various retirement accounts (401(k) and so on). While you are alive, those are substantially protected from most lawsuits. Once you die, is the money still protected? That might depend on the beneficiary (a spouse can treat it like their own, another heir cannot). Or money in an irrevocable trust.
As an executor, I just told all his debtors (my Dad didnt have many, just like utility bills, and the current Credit card bill) that he had died, and they just dropped them. Mind you, none were very much, iirc the highest was like $300, so it wasnt worth their time.
From what I’ve read, assorted Trump memoirs, when Fred Sr. died, he was advanced in dementia. Donald had initially tried to get his dad to sign over trusteeship of the family business to himself, but the other surviving siblings balked. Later he had his father change the will to disinherit Mary and Fred Trump, children of his dead older brother. (Except for a few hundred thou in trust - so 4 shares instead of 5)
The two children sued before the will was settled (so relebvant to this thread) and eventually reached a settlement with an NDA.
Mary is apparently re-sueing, but not to change the will. She alleges fraud on the part of assorted others who misrepresented the value of the estate when getting her and her brrother to settle. So perhaps that is the exception - if there was alleged misrepresentation (or worse) during the settlement of a will, then theassets of the heirs are fair game for re-opening if you can prove your case.
That wasn’t really a matter of suing a defendant as described in the OP- they were contesting the will and I believe claiming that Donald exerted undue influence on Fred.