Will & Appointment of Estate of Kipke v. Kipka
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HUSPENI, Judge. *
In challenging the district court’s grant of summary judgment to intervenors and respondent estate, appellant argues that the district court erred in determining that (1) the Minnesota Durable Power of Attorney Act prohibits appellant from receiving benefits of a decedent’s non-probate assets because decedent designated appellant as his attorney-in-fact prior to naming him a beneficiary of those assets, (2) the decedent’s change of beneficiary on annuity life insurance policies was invalid, and (3) appellant was not the rightful owner of a checking account in his name…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Thiele v. StichSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- American Family Insurance Group v. SchroedlSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2000
- Lefto v. Hoggsbreath Enterprises, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1998
- Swogger v. TaylorSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1955
- Brajovich v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1933
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Robert Gelschus v. Clifford HogenCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2022
- Faegre & Benson, LLP v. R & R INVESTORSCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2009
- BCBSM, Inc. v. Minnesota Comprehensive Health Ass'nCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2006