Shauna Sandstead-Corona, Petitioner v. Vicki J. Sandstead, Respondent

Summary

The court reversed the court of appeals and held that the probate court had jurisdiction to determine whether the disputed farm proceeds belonged to the estate and could impose an implied constructive trust over them. Because Sandstead held the funds in a confidential relationship and misused them contrary to the parties’ shared intent, the probate court could surcharge her for the loss, including conduct predating her appointment as personal representative. The court also held that the trust’s no-contest clause, strictly construed, barred contests to the trust but not Corona’s challenge to the pour-over will; it therefore did not reach probable cause. No separate opinions were provided.