Title: In re Estate of Mainolfi

State: vermont

Issuer: Vermont Supreme Court

Document:

In re Estate of Mainolfi (2004-241); 178 Vt. 588; 878 A.2d 287

2005 VT 61

[Filed 01-Jun-2005]

                                 ENTRY ORDER

                                 2005 VT 61

                      SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 2004-241

                             FEBRUARY TERM, 2005

  In re Estate of Sara Mainolfi	       }	APPEALED FROM:
                                       }
                                       }
                                       }	Rutland Superior Court
                                       }	
  	                               }
                                       }	DOCKET NOS. 278/302-5-03 Rdcv

                                                Trial Judge: Richard W. Norton

             In the above-entitled cause, the Clerk will enter:

       ¶  1.  The estate of Sara Mainolfi appeals an order by the Rutland
  Superior Court affirming  a Probate Court decision awarding a $75,000
  homestead interest in her former home to the estate of her husband, Frank
  Mainolfi.  The trial court determined that Frank Mainolfi's quitclaim deed
  conveying "all right and title" in the marital home did not convey his
  homestead interest to his wife because the interest had not yet vested at
  the time of the deed, and that his estate was therefore entitled to the
  $75,000 homestead interest after her death.  We affirm.  Title 27 V.S.A. §
  105 vests a surviving spouse with the same interest in the homestead with
  which the decedent spouse was vested at death, and neither spouse can
  transfer or waive the homestead interest before it vests.

       ¶  2.  Sara and Frank Mainolfi married and purchased a home in
  Rutland, Vermont.  They lived in the home together until Sara died on
  December 5, 2001.  Frank continued to live in the home until he passed away
  three weeks later, intestate, on December 26.  Neither Sara nor Frank had
  any children.  Three written instruments form the background to the dispute
  between their estates.

       ¶  3.  First, a quitclaim deed, executed by both Sara and Frank in
  1993, purported to "remise, release, and forever quitclaim[] . . . all
  right and title" in their home to their nephews, Albert Clarino and Thomas
  Olsen, and reserved a life estate for the Mainolfis.  Second, another
  quitclaim deed, executed by the nephews and Frank Mainolfi in 1995,
  quitclaimed all right and title in the same home to Sara, reserving a life
  estate for Frank.  Finally, Sara's will, executed the same day as the
  second quitclaim deed, devised her estate (minus debts, administrative
  expenses, and a bequest) to the nephews as tenants in common. (FN1)    

       ¶  4.  The superior court determined that Frank Mainolfi's estate
  was entitled to a $75,000 interest in the proceeds from the sale of the
  home, pursuant to 27 V.S.A. § 101 and § 105.  The superior court concluded
  that, because the homestead interest is inchoate while both spouses are
  still living and ripens into an absolute right only upon the death of one
  spouse, Frank Mainolfi's 1995 conveyance to his wife by quitclaim deed of
  "all right and title" in the marital home did not convey the homestead
  interest.  Sara Mainolfi's estate appeals, challenging, first, the
  "interpretation of the legal effect of a conveyance by a husband to his
  wife of all his right and title in their marital residence."  Second,
  appellant challenges the trial court's "assumptions of fact where they
  neglected to conduct an evidentiary hearing to support their decision"
  regarding the will- and deed-makers' intent.  We consider each argument in
  turn.

       ¶  5.  Appellant's first argument-that the second quitclaim deed
  conveyed Frank's homestead interest to his wife-is unavailing under the
  plain language of 27 V.S.A. § 105.  The superior court's interpretation of
  the legal effect of the deeds is a conclusion of law; our review is
  nondeferential and plenary.  Vt. Alliance of Nonprofit Orgs. v. City of
  Burlington, 2004 VT 57, ¶ 5,