Legal Opinion
In Re Estate of Karnen
South Dakota Supreme Court
Decided March 1, 2000No. NonePublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MILLER, Chief Justice.
[¶ 1.] This case presents our first opportunity to interpret certain provisions of our Unified Probate Code (UPC) elective share provisions effective as of July 1, 1995. Andrew Karnen appeals the denial of his petition for elective share from his wife’s estate, disputing the determination and value of assets used to satisfy his elective share entitlement. We affirm.
FACTS
[¶ 2.] The essential facts in this case are not in dispute. Rose Karnen and Andrew Karnen married in July 1947, when Rose was approximately forty years old. There were no children born to this marriage.…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Petition of Famous Brands, Inc.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1984
- State v. PellegrinoSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1998
- Matter of Estate of JetterSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1997
- Mid-Western Electric, Inc. v. DeWild Grant Reckert & Associates Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1993
- Davis v. KresslySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1961
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Peterson, Ex Rel. Peterson v. BurnsSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2001
- In Re the Estate of GeierSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2012
- Peterson v. BurnsSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2001
- In Re Estate of AmundsonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2001
- Estate of Zoss v. South Dakota Department of RevenueSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2001
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.