Deborah Knott-Wessells v. Amy Bowman and the Estate of Tom Knott/Bowman

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA
FILED
DEBORAH KNOTT-WESSELLS,
June 27, 2025
ASHLEY N. DEEM, CHIEF DEPUTY CLERK
Plaintiff Below, Petitioner INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS
OF WEST VIRGINIA

v.) No. 24-ICA-337 (Cir. Ct. Jefferson Cnty. Case No. CC-19-2023-C-137)

AMY BOWMAN and
the ESTATE OF TOM KNOTT/BOWMAN,
Defendants Below, Respondents

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Petitioner Deborah Knott-Wessells appeals the July 29, 2024, order of the Circuit
Court of Jefferson County. In that order, the circuit court granted summary judgment in
favor of Respondents Amy Bowman and the Estate of Tom Knott/Bowman and held that
the Last Will and Testament of Thomas Knott was valid and enforceable. Ms. Bowman
and the Estate of Tom Knott/Bowman jointly filed a response in support of the circuit
court’s order.1 Ms. Knott-Wessells filed a reply.
This Court has jurisdiction over this appeal pursuant to West Virginia Code § 51-
11-4 (2024). After considering the parties’ arguments, the record on appeal, and the
applicable law, this Court finds no substantial question of law and no prejudicial error. For
these reasons, a memorandum decision affirming the circuit court’s order is appropriate
under Rule 21 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure.
Ms. Bowman and the decedent Thomas Knott were duly and legally married on
September 11, 2017, in Jefferson County, West Virginia. During their marriage, Ms.
Bowman and Mr. Knott co-owned several restaurants and a home in Washington, D.C.,
before relocating to West Virginia. Additionally, Ms. Bowman and Mr. Knott owned
several parcels of real estate in Jefferson County, West Virginia. Petitioner Deborah Knott-
Wessells is the estranged sister of Mr. Knott.
Mr. Knott passed away on February 1, 2023. Mr. Knott died testate as evidenced by
his Last Will and Testament executed on October 14, 2022. The Will is handwritten, and
states as follows:

1
Ms. Knott-Wessells is self-represented. Ms. Bowman and the Estate of Tom
Knott/Bowman are represented by Eric S. Black, Esq.
1
I Thomas Stanley Knott III, being of sound mind, want my wife Amy Anne
Bowman to inherit all of my possessions when I die including
-122 West German Street and 123 West Back Alley in Shepherdstown, WV.
-My one-third portion of 1471 West Washington St in Harpers Ferry, WV.
-Our three vehicles 2019 BMW, 2006 BMW, 1978 Ford F150 Ranger.
-Sports cards and memorabilia.
-Everything in our bank accounts and safety deposit box.
-Our joint accounts at Edelman Financial, JSB, and Bank of America/Merrel.
-All items in our private residence and in our vacation rental units.

The Will is signed by Mr. Knott, witnessed by two individuals, and notarized by a
licensed Notary Public. Affidavits by the witnesses both state that Mr. Knott was of sound
mind and memory at the time of execution of the Will. On May 5, 2023, the County
Commission of Jefferson County, West Virginia, entered a Probate Order admitting the
Last Will and Testament of Mr. Knott. The Probate Order was recorded in the records of
the Jefferson County Clerk on May 5, 2023, at Book No. 37, Page 195.
On August 4, 2023, Ms. Knott-Wessels filed her Petition & Complaint in the circuit
court. The complaint generally sought to invalidate the Will on the basis that it did not
contain appropriate language to make it a valid Will. The complaint further asserted that
Ms. Bowman concealed Mr. Knott’s death from, and was rude and insulting to, Mr. Knott’s
family. The complaint sought “25% of the whole Estate of Tommy Knott that is at least $2
million dollars or more[.]”
Thereafter, Ms. Bowman moved to dismiss, which the circuit court denied by
holding that Ms. Knott-Wessells “has sufficiently, albeit in conclusory terms, set forth a
plausible cause of action.” The circuit court ordered the testamentary documents to be filed,
which they were on January 17, 2024. Ms. Bowman then filed her answer and counterclaim
for declaratory judgment seeking to have the court determine that Mr. Knott’s Will was
valid.
On June 12, 2024, Ms. Bowman moved for summary judgment. On July 29, 2024,
the circuit court entered the order on appeal. In that order, the circuit court granted
summary judgment in favor of Ms. Bowman on the basis that the Will was properly
executed pursuant to West Virginia Code § 41-1-3 (1882), Mr. Knott had no probate assets,
and even if the Will were set aside, Ms. Bowman would inherit all of Mr. Knott’s estate
pursuant to intestate succession.
Our review of a circuit court’s entry of summary judgment is de novo. Syl. Pt. 1,
Painter v. Peavy, 192 W. Va. 189, 451 S.E.2d 755 (1994). In conducting a de novo review,
this Court applies the same standard for granting summary judgment that a circuit court

2
must apply: “[a] motion for summary judgment should be granted only when it is clear that
there is no genuine issue of fact to be tried and inquiry concerning the facts is not desirable
to clarify the application of the law.” United Bank, Inc. v. Blosser, 218 W. Va. 378, 383,
624 S.E.2d 815, 820 (2005) (quoting Painter, 192 W. Va. at 190, 451 S.E.2d at 756, Syl.
Pt. 2).
On appeal, Ms. Knott-Wessells does not specifically assert assignments of error, in
violation of Rule 10(c)(3) of the West Virginia Rules of Appellate Procedure. 2
Nevertheless, Ms. Knott-Wessells generally asserts that the circuit court erred by not
invalidating the Will. However, Ms. Knott-Wessells lacks standing to pursue such claim
because even if the Will were set aside, Ms. Knott-Wessells would still not be entitled to
the relief she seeks. See Syl. Pt. 5, in part, Findley v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 213
W. Va. 80, 84, 576 S.E.2d 807, 811 (2002) (“it must be likely that the injury will
be redressed through a favorable decision of the court.”)
Pursuant to West Virginia Code § 42-1-3(a)(1) (1993), the share of a surviving
spouse of the decedent is the entire intestate estate of the decedent if “[n]o descendant of
the decedent survives the decedent[.]” Here, it is undisputed that the decedent, Mr. Knott,
had no children and therefore Ms. Bowman, as his surviving spouse, would inherit Mr.
Knott’s entire intestate estate if the Will were set aside. 3 Accordingly, since Ms. Knott-
Wessells’ alleged injury cannot be redressed by a favorable decision by the circuit court,
Ms. Knott-Wessells lacked standing to pursue her claim, and the circuit court did not err in
granting summary judgment against her.4

2
While the failure to assert assignments of error can be fatal to appellate review,
See Wilson v. Kerr, No. 19-0933, 2020 WL 7391150, at *2 (W. Va. Dec. 16, 2020)
(memorandum decision), here, the simplicity of Ms. Knott-Wessells’ case is easily
distinguishable from the complexity of the Wilson case where our Supreme Court of
Appeals noted that the number of named defendants alone underscored the need for a clear
recitation of the asserted error.
3
While Ms. Knott-Wessells argues that she is entitled to a share of the intestate
estate if the Will were set aside, she misunderstands our laws of intestate succession. Under
the facts of this case, if any part of the intestate estate did not pass to the surviving spouse
and there were no descendants and no parents of Mr. Knott to inherit such part of the estate,
only then would the intestate estate or any part thereof go to “the descendants of the
decedent’s parents or either of them by representation.” W. Va. Code § 42-1-3a. However,
here, as outlined above, the surviving spouse, Ms. Bowman, would inherit the entirety of
the intestate estate if the Will were set aside.
4
Ms. Knott-Wessells makes various other arguments, including that some
properties may have been titled in Ms. Bowman’s mother’s name and not the decedent’s
3
Therefore, based on the foregoing, the July 29, 2024, order of the Circuit Court of
Jefferson County is affirmed.
Affirmed.

ISSUED: June 27, 2025

CONCURRED IN BY:

Chief Judge Charles O. Lorensen
Judge Daniel W. Greear
Judge S. Ryan White

mother’s name; that the motion for summary judgment was in violation of the circuit
court’s scheduling order; and generally, that the circuit court erred by denying various
motions. However, Ms. Knott-Wessells does not cite to the record or elaborate as to how
these arguments amount to error. Pursuant to Rule 10(c)(7) the Court disregards these
arguments as not adequately supported by specific references to the record on appeal.
4