The Nebraska Court of Appeals recently ruled on a case involving Christine K. Reilly, who filed a lawsuit against attorney Thomas R. Pansing and his law firm, Pansing Hogan Ernst & Bachman LLP. The court's decision, filed on May 19, 2026, addresses the issue of standing in a professional malpractice claim related to changes made to estate documents. This ruling affects not only Reilly but also sets a precedent for how heirs and beneficiaries can pursue claims against attorneys in similar situations.

In this case, Reilly, who is an heir and beneficiary of the George J. Kubat Revocable Trust and the Estate of George J. Kubat, alleged that Pansing committed professional malpractice by drafting and facilitating changes to her father's estate documents shortly before his death. The court's ruling clarifies the legal standing required for individuals to bring such claims, particularly in the context of estate and trust law.

Reilly's lawsuit arose after her father, George Kubat, made significant changes to his estate documents while in a hospital, which included increasing the bequest to his girlfriend, Maureen Walsh. Following George's death, Reilly and her siblings contested the validity of these changes, leading to a jury trial that ultimately invalidated the last will and testament executed shortly before his passing. Reilly sought to recover attorney fees incurred during this litigation, claiming that Pansing's actions had caused unnecessary legal costs.

The Nebraska Court of Appeals, in its ruling, examined whether Reilly had the legal standing to bring her claims against Pansing and his firm. The court found that standing is a jurisdictional issue, meaning only parties with a direct interest in the outcome of a case may invoke the court's jurisdiction. In this instance, the court determined that Reilly did not have standing to bring a derivative action on behalf of the estate or the trust.

The court stated, "To have standing, the plaintiff must have some legal or equitable right, title, or interest in the subject matter of the controversy." This means that simply being an heir or beneficiary does not automatically grant the right to sue on behalf of the estate or trust, especially if there is an appointed personal representative or special administrator who is responsible for such actions.

In the case of the estate, the court noted that the Nebraska Probate Code assigns the right and duty to sue for recovery of assets to the appointed personal representative. Since Reilly was not appointed to act on behalf of the estate, she lacked the necessary standing to pursue her claims. The court emphasized that Reilly could have sought the removal of the special administrator or requested the appointment of a new one if she believed that her interests were not being adequately represented.

Regarding her claims on behalf of the trust, the court reiterated that generally, it is the trustee who has the authority to bring legal actions on behalf of the trust. The court found that Reilly failed to demonstrate that the trustee was improperly refusing to act, which would have allowed her to pursue a derivative action. The ruling affirmed the lower court's decision to grant summary judgment in favor of Pansing and his law firm.

The impact of this ruling is significant for heirs and beneficiaries involved in estate disputes. It clarifies the limitations of standing in legal actions related to estates and trusts, reinforcing the idea that only those with specific legal authority can pursue claims against attorneys for malpractice. This decision may discourage individuals from attempting to file lawsuits without the proper legal standing, thereby streamlining the litigation process in such cases.

Looking ahead, the ruling in Reilly v. Pansing Hogan Ernst & Bachman may set a precedent for future cases involving claims of professional malpractice in estate planning and administration. While Reilly's case cannot be appealed further, it highlights the importance of understanding the legal framework surrounding estate and trust law, particularly for heirs and beneficiaries seeking to assert their rights.