In re Estate of Oaks
Wisconsin Court of Appeals
944 N.W.2d 611 (2020)
- Written by Liz Nakamura, JD
Facts
David Oaks and Lynne Stouff (defendant), unmarried, cohabitated during the last 10 years of their 23-year romantic relationship. Oaks had one estranged adult daughter, Cheri Wardell (plaintiff), from a prior relationship. On March 7, 2018, Oaks wrote two handwritten notes, one gifting all his worldly possessions to Stouff, and the other a personal note to Stouff about the gift. On March 8, Oaks died by suicide. Stouff found the notes on the downstairs table when she came down to investigate the sound of the gunshot that killed Oaks. Oaks died intestate, and Wardell was his only child. Wardell filed a formal administration petition for Oaks’s estate and was appointed the estate’s (plaintiff) representative. Stouff filed a claim against the estate and moved for summary judgment, contending she was entitled to the entirety of the estate pursuant to the doctrine of gift causa mortis. Stouff presented evidence that Oaks was a Vietnam War veteran who suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), for which he was actively receiving treatment, but which caused him physical and mental suffering. Oaks’s death certificate listed the cause of death as a “self-inflicting gunshot wound to head . . . [d]ue to or as a consequence of ‘depression.’” The fact that Oaks made his gift to Stouff in contemplation of his death was undisputed. The estate countered, arguing that a gift causa mortis could not occur in the context of suicide because suicide was not a present illness or external danger. The circuit court granted Stouff’s motion for summary judgment, and the estate appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Stark, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 790,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.