Court Rules Estate Beneficiaries Cannot Sue Parents’ Attorneys

What Happened

The Nebraska Court of Appeals ruled in February 2026 that Cory Kudlacek could not sue his deceased parents’ estate planning law firm, even though he was named as a beneficiary in their trust. The case arose from a family dispute over whether the parents’ revocable trust should have been drafted as an irrevocable trust instead.

In 2019, Marlene and Loran Kudlacek hired attorney William Olson and his firm Olson Zalewski Wynner LLP to update their estate plan. Their goals included allowing son Cory to continue operating the family farm, providing an inheritance for their other son Chad, and eventually transferring assets to grandchildren. The parents executed a joint revocable trust and other estate planning documents.

After Loran died in July 2020, family litigation erupted between Marlene and Cory over the estate plan. In 2022, before the family dispute settled, Cory sued the law firm claiming they were negligent in drafting a revocable trust when his parents allegedly wanted an irrevocable trust. The trial court granted summary judgment for the law firm, and the appellate court affirmed that decision.

What It Means

This Nebraska ruling reinforces a fundamental principle in estate planning law: attorneys owe their duty of loyalty exclusively to the clients who hire them, not to beneficiaries named in the estate plan. The court emphasized that allowing beneficiaries to sue estate planning attorneys would create an impossible conflict of interest, preventing lawyers from zealously representing their actual clients’ wishes.

The decision highlights the complex dynamics that can arise in family estate planning, particularly when parents create revocable trusts. Unlike irrevocable trusts, revocable trusts can be modified or revoked entirely during the grantor’s lifetime. In this case, Marlene exercised that flexibility in March 2020 when she amended the trust to distribute income to both sons instead of just Cory. This type of modification is exactly what revocable trusts are designed to allow.

For families navigating estate planning, this case underscores the importance of clear communication about intentions and expectations. When parents choose a revocable trust structure, they retain complete control over the assets and can change beneficiaries or distributions at any time. Beneficiaries have no legal claim to inheritance until the grantor dies and the trust becomes irrevocable. This flexibility often serves families well, but it can also create uncertainty for intended beneficiaries who may have different expectations about their inheritance.

Context from SimplyTrust

Understanding the difference between revocable and irrevocable trusts is crucial for anyone creating an estate plan. Revocable trusts offer flexibility and control, allowing grantors to modify terms, change beneficiaries, or dissolve the trust entirely during their lifetime. This flexibility comes with the trade-off that beneficiaries have no guaranteed rights until the grantor’s death.

The Kudlacek case also illustrates why some families experience conflicts over estate plans. When family members have different understandings about inheritance expectations, disputes can arise. Clear communication and documentation of intentions can help prevent such conflicts. SimplyTrust trusts include built-in protections like no-contest clauses and mandatory mediation requirements to address potential family disputes while keeping them out of court.

Source: Son, Beneficiary of Estate Plan, Could Not Sue Parents’ Law Firm