Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-20-05 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA , ,'\ IN RE: ESTATE OF ROBERT M. MUMMA, ORPHANS' COURT DIVISION Deceased No. 21-86-398 REQUEST FOR ORDER THAT ESTATE HAS WAIVED ITS RIGHT TO CONTEST A r, DISCLAIMER FILED AND REVOKED 9R. ALTERNATIVELY. REQUEST FOR IMMEDIATE HEARING TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE ESTATE HAS WAIVED ITS RIGHT AND NOW, comes the Petitioner, Robert M. Mumma, pro se, and files the within Request for Order that Estate has Waived its Right to Contest a Disclaimer Filed and Revoked by Robert M. Mumma II or, alternatively, Request for Immediate Hearing TO Determine Whether the Estate has Waived its Right to Contest the Disclaimer and in support thereof avers the following: 1. Petitioner is Robert M. Mumma, an adult individual, acting pro se. 2. Petitioner is a beneficiary of the Estate of his late father, Robert M. Mumma. 3. In January 1987, upon advice from counsel at Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, (which was and still is counsel for the Estate and which at the time was also advising Robert M. Mumma II in an individual capacity) Robert M. Mumma II signed a disclaimer of his rights to his father's estate. 4. Notwithstanding Robert M. Mumma II's statement that he was uncertain as to whether he wanted the disclaimer filed, Morgan, Lewis & Backius forwarded it to the Estate's local counsel, who filed the disclaimer on January 1 2, 1987. Vi- 5. Approximately three (3) years later on January 23, 1990, the Cumberland County Register of Wills Ordered Robert M. Mumma II's disclaimer Revoked. 6. Robert M. Mumma II has continuously maintained that he is a beneficiary of the Estate of his late father. 7. In filings with this Court the Estate has even admitted that Robert M. Mumma II is a beneficiary of the Estate of his late father. 8. As recently as four (4) months ago the Estate admitted that Robert M. Mumma II is a beneficiary of the Estate of his late father. Please see #4 of Exhibit "A", which is a copy of Robert M. Mumma II's Motion to Compel Discovery; then, see # 4 of Estate's Response to Exhibit A, which is attached hereto as Exhibit "B". 9. In one of its most recent filings, though, the Estate has once again token the position that a question exists os to whether Robert M. Mumma II disclaimed his rights to the Estate of his late father. 10. The Estate has taken contrary positions with regard to whether Robert M. Mumma II is a beneficiary to the Estate of his late father. 11. The Estate should be precluded from raising the Disclaimer issue in that it has admitted in filings with this Court that Robert M. Mumma II is a beneficiary of the Estate of his late father. 12. By raising the Disclaimer issue at this time the Estate is simply attempting to frustrate the resolution of this matter when it has knowingly waived that issue by previously admitting that Robert M. Mumma II is a beneficiary of the Estate of his late father. 13. Based upon the conflicting positions of the Estate, Robert M. Mumma II requests this Court determine the Estate has waived it right to raise the Disclaimer issue. 14. Alternatively, Robert M. Mumma II requests an immediate hearing on this matter to determine whether the Estate has waived its ability to contest the disclaimer so as to put this issue to rest. 15. The interests of justice would best be served by resolving this matter immediately. WHEREFORE, Robert M. Mumma II respectfully requests this Court find the Estate has waived its right to question the Disclaimer due to its admissions to the contrary or, alternatively, to schedule an immediate hearing to determine whether the Estate has waived its rights to contest the Disclaimer. .~f1tz <~~4 Robert M. Mumma II Pro Se " IN nUl COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBIlRUND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA IN RE ESTATE OF ROBERT M. MUMMA, ORPHAN'S COURT DMSION Decelllllld. No.; 21-86-398 -;:_':':""'::=:'::..t;1 M. Mumma and an ObjectoJ' to the lI(:(lountina oCThe Estate, aDd by and ~ 6 COUIIsel 61cs 1bis Motion to CoIXlpel DillCOvery and in lI1IPPort thereof avers: f3~~ ~ 1. RobertM.MummadilldonApriI12.1986. ~- <:) 2. Usa M. MOIJlll1 m:I Barbara McK, MlIIIID1a WtR appointed 81 executrixes oCThe Estate on June S, 1986. 3. The Will for Robert M. MWIIIIII made Llta M. Morpn and Ba.rbafa McK. Mumma the Trustee& of two 1rusls erea1ed under the Will. 4. Robert M. Mumma II is a beue1iciary of The &tate and of the two testammtary trU81S created under The Will of Robert M. M1Illl1lla. 5, Robert M. Mumma II bas f11ed objections to the accounting of The Estate and bas requested that tbe &ecutrixes llI1d Trustees !xl removed. 6. On or about October 27. 2004, Robert M. Mumma II 8eIIt Interrogatories an.d fequests for prod\JCtion of doc:uments to colmlel fOr the Estate, Trusts. Executrixes, and TrusteeS. 7. There is no question that Robert M. Mumma Jl bas a right to ell requ~ discovery. ~ Foil_bee v. n..n~b S6 Pa. D. & C. 41h 483 (Allesheny County 2002) (StadD.lthat the attornoy-elient privil"8e cannot be userted by a ttustee ~~ g3~ ;~ ~~ against a beneficiary when the trustee sought legal advice in his or her fiduciary capacity regarding trust administration.). 8. This doctrine should apply equally to executors of estates as they are in the same fiduciary position as trustees. 9. The Estate, Trusts, Executrixes, Trustees, and their counsel did not respond and have not responded to the discovery requests and did not object to any discovery requests. 10. The Estate, Trusts, Executrixes, Trustees, and their counsel have essentially ignored the requests for discovery. WHEREFORE Robert M. Mununa II respectfully requests that this Honorable Court Order the Estate, Trusts, Executrixes, and Trustees to comply with Robert M. Mumma II's requests for discovery. Respectfully Submitted, 7) ~ et/1-:~ ~ Daryl(, . Christopher, Esq. J.D. No.: 91895 #~ Kirk~ Sohonage, Esq. l.D. No.: 77851 840 Market Street Lemoyne, P A 17043 (717) 612-1600