DANIEL STEWART; RACHEL KOSOFF v. DAVID W. MARTIN, individually and in his official capacity as Trustee of the Declaration and Agreement of Trust of May 15, 2020, BETSY MARTIN SMITH; JANET BERTOLINO; SUSAN WEINERT - Articles

All Content

DANIEL STEWART; RACHEL KOSOFF v. DAVID W. MARTIN, individually and in his official capacity as Trustee of the Declaration and Agreement of Trust of May 15, 2020, BETSY MARTIN SMITH; JANET BERTOLINO; SUSAN WEINERT

Posted by: Azya Thornton on Jul 7, 2025

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ARGUED: Steven F. Pflaum, NEAL, GERBER & EISENBERG LLP, Chicago, Illinois, for Appellants/Cross-Appellees.

Attorneys 2: ARGUED: Philip D. Williamson, TAFT STETTINIUS & HOLLISTER LLP, Cincinnati, Ohio, for Appellee Cross-Appellant.

Attorneys 3: ON BRIEF: Steven F. Pflaum, Joshua Hart Burday, NEAL, GERBER & EISENBERG LLP, Chicago, Illinois, Jeffrey R. Rosenberg, IFMK LAW, LTD., Northbrook, Illinois, for Appellants/Cross-Appellees. Philip D. Williamson, Annie M. McClellan, TAFT STETTINIUS & HOLLISTER LLP, Cincinnati, Ohio, Glen R. McMurry, TAFT, STETTINIUS & HOLLISTER LLP, Dayton, Ohio, Aaron M. Bernay, Ryan W. Goellner, Zackary L. Stillings, FROST BROWN TODD LLC, Cincinnati, Ohio, for Appellee Cross-Appellant.

Attorneys 4: ON BRIEF: Steven F. Pflaum, Joshua Hart Burday, NEAL, GERBER & EISENBERG LLP, Chicago, Illinois, Jeffrey R. Rosenberg, IFMK LAW, LTD., Northbrook, Illinois, for Appellants/Cross-Appellees. Philip D. Williamson, Annie M. McClellan, TAFT STETTINIUS & HOLLISTER LLP, Cincinnati, Ohio, Glen R. McMurry, TAFT, STETTINIUS & HOLLISTER LLP, Dayton, Ohio, Aaron M. Bernay, Ryan W. Goellner, Zackary L. Stillings, FROST BROWN TODD LLC, Cincinnati, Ohio, for Appellee Cross-Appellant.

Judge(s): CLAY, THAPAR, and READLER, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio at Dayton

THAPAR, Circuit Judge. Lester Martin was a renowned pediatric surgeon at Cincinnati Children’s hospital. He served in World War II, trained a generation of doctors, and made crucial advancements in the medical field before passing away at age 96. There’s no question that Dr. Martin left quite a legacy for his family to be proud of. Unfortunately, though, this case is not about his legacy. Instead, it’s about the material goods he left behind. And those goods have led to a long and protracted family feud. Here, we address two parts of that saga. Did the district court have jurisdiction to hear a dispute about who should get what? And did two of Lester’s grandkids need experts to show they didn’t get what they were owed?

Attachments: