Norman v. Gober
Annotate this CaseIn "Norman v. Gober,"(707 SE2d 98 (2011)), the Supreme Court considered whether eleven-year-old William Howard Norman had standing to challenge the will of his maternal grandmother, Margaret Scheer, because he was not an heir-at-law when his caveat was filed. The Court found that Norman lacked standing to challenge the will because he was not "a person who will be injured by probate of [the] [W]ill, or who will benefit by its not being probated." After this opinion was issued, the Co-Executors filed a Petition for Declaratory Judgment and served discovery requests on the other beneficiaries to ascertain the facts surrounding the caveat. The appellant beneficiaries filed a motion to dismiss the Co-Executors’ petition for failure to state a claim, arguing there was no uncertainty of law and therefore no justification to request a declaratory judgment. Specifically, Appellants contended that (1) the prior caveat filed by Norman, which was dismissed for lack of standing, was not an actual will contest, and, therefore, the in terrorem clause could not have been violated by anyone, even by attribution and (2) the rights of the parties had already accrued and no uncertainty remained requiring direction from the court. The probate court denied the motion to dismiss and later denied Appellants’ motion for reconsideration. Finding no error in the probate court's decisions, the Supreme Court affirmed.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.