## Facts

- Nina L. Parkhurst executed a durable power of attorney for financial matters and an advance health care directive while she was competent, naming her son Randall L. Boykin as her agent for personal, financial, and medical decisions if she became incapacitated.
- Parkhurst later became incapacitated, and Randall began acting under the power of attorney and health care directive.
- Several years later, Parkhurst’s other son, Douglas L. Boykin, petitioned for appointment of a guardian and conservator, alleging Randall was abusing Parkhurst and dissipating her estate for Randall’s benefit.
- Randall responded with a motion to dismiss under W.R.C.P. 12(b)(6). The district court denied the motion in an early decision letter, indicating the case should proceed.
- The district court appointed a guardian ad litem (GAL) to investigate and report whether a guardianship or conservatorship was needed.
- At the time of the investigation, Parkhurst was 75 years old, suffered from moderate dementia, and was in good physical condition.
- The GAL found Parkhurst lived in appropriate accommodations with constant adult companionship and assistance, and that her care needs were being met.
- The GAL also found Randall was properly managing Parkhurst’s finances and estate.
- The GAL’s sole stated concern was that the durable power of attorney permitted Randall to make gifts of Parkhurst’s property to himself, although the GAL found Randall had never exercised that authority.
- The GAL recommended appointing Randall as guardian and conservator mainly so he would be subject to court reporting and supervision.
- After the GAL report, Randall moved for summary judgment. The district court accepted the GAL’s factual findings and granted summary judgment for Randall, concluding guardianship and conservatorship were unnecessary because Parkhurst’s existing arrangements were functioning.
- Douglas appealed, arguing (among other points) that the district court’s earlier denial of the motion to dismiss became law of the case and barred the later summary judgment.

## Issues

1. Did the law-of-the-case doctrine prevent the district court from granting summary judgment after it previously denied a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss?
2. On this record, were the statutory requirements met for appointing a guardian and conservator despite Parkhurst’s existing durable power of attorney and health care directive?

## Decision

- The Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed the district court’s judgment.
- The Court held the law-of-the-case doctrine did not apply because the earlier denial of the motion to dismiss was an interlocutory ruling, not a final decision, and did not bar a later summary-judgment ruling on a developed record.
- The Court agreed summary judgment was proper because the undisputed evidence showed Parkhurst was appropriately cared for and her finances were properly managed under the existing instruments.
- The Court rejected the argument that a guardianship or conservatorship was required merely to obtain court supervision and reporting, where the record did not show actual misuse of authority or a present need for the more restrictive court process.
- The Court treated the unexercised self-gifting clause in the power of attorney as an insufficient basis, by itself, to require appointment of a guardian or conservator.

## Legal Principles

- Law of the case applies to final decisions; it does not bind a court to an earlier, nonfinal ruling such as a denial of a motion to dismiss.
- Denial of a Rule 12(b)(6) motion tests the pleadings; summary judgment tests the evidence. A court may grant summary judgment later when the record shows no genuine dispute of material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
- Guardianship and conservatorship require a showing that the appointment is necessary for the ward’s welfare and that the ward’s needs are not being adequately met through less restrictive arrangements.
- Valid planning instruments executed while competent—such as durable powers of attorney and advance health care directives—may serve as effective alternatives to guardianship and conservatorship when they are working as intended.
- Allegations and speculative risk are not enough to displace an existing arrangement; a party seeking guardianship or conservatorship must point to evidence of misuse, mismanagement, or other facts showing a real need for court intervention.

## Conclusion

The Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed summary judgment denying Douglas Boykin’s petition because the developed record, including the GAL’s findings, showed Nina Parkhurst was properly cared for and her estate was properly managed under existing powers of attorney, and the earlier denial of a motion to dismiss did not prevent the district court from later granting summary judgment.


In re Guardianship and Conservatorship of Parkhurst, 2010 Wy. 155, 243 P.3d 961 (2010)