In re Krebes

2 Citing cases

  1. In re Guardianship, Conservatorship of Durand

    859 N.W.2d 780 (Minn. 2015)   Cited 9 times
    Providing that appellate courts apply intermediate scrutiny to gender-based classifications

    Krebes–Lufkin initially challenged the Hennepin County District Court order in the Dakota County probate proceeding, but did not prevail. See In re Estate of Krebes, 2012 WL 987310 (Minn.App. Mar. 26, 2012), rev. denied (Minn. June 19, 2012). Krebes–Lufkin argued that: (1) she did not receive proper notice of ADMI's petition for authorization; and (2) the Hennepin County court had not found that the exercise of the right of election was necessary to provide adequate support for Durand, a “protected person” under a conservatorship, as required by Minn.Stat. § 524.2–212.

  2. In re Guardianship of Durand

    845 N.W.2d 821 (Minn. Ct. App. 2014)   Cited 2 times

    Alternatively, this court found that, while the lack of notice to appellant regarding the elective-share proceeding was in error because she was an “interested person” as defined by statute, it was not a jurisdictional defect rendering the probate court's order void. In re Estate of Krebes, No. A11–1408, 2012 WL 987310, at *3–4 (Minn.App. Mar. 26, 2012), review denied (Minn. June 19, 2012).