Ex-Buffalo Bills Player Wins Control Over Murdered Wife's Estate
The opinion tells the tragic story of Sandra Barnett, who married former NFL player Buster Barnett in 1987 and was kidnapped and killed in 2015 after a highly publicized police chase.
January 11, 2019 at 02:02 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on New York Law Journal
Suppose a husband was having trouble divorcing his wife because she succeeded in having the final decree set aside, and suppose his girlfriend kidnapped the wife—in his car—and killed her. Would the husband, who denies any role in the murder, then be able to take over his dead wife's estate and act as her personal representative?
Yes, according to a ruling Thursday by the Georgia Court of Appeals in an unusual probate dispute. Judge Carla McMillian wrote for a unanimous panel that included Presiding Judge Anne Barnes and Judge Clyde Reese. They affirmed the position taken by Clayton County Probate Judge Pam Ferguson.
The opinion tells the tragic story of Sandra Barnett. In 1987, she married Buster Barnett, a former player with the NFL's Buffalo Bills. After 24 years, in 2011, he filed for divorce. When she didn't show for the bench trial in 2012, he was granted the decree he sought. She later argued that she never received the papers because he had them sent to the wrong address. She hired a lawyer to reopen discovery. The divorce was set aside in 2014. He filed for divorce again in June 2015.
But a month after the husband's second attempt to divorce his wife, his girlfriend, Lisa Brown, kidnapped Sandra from her home near Atlanta at gunpoint, according to McMillian. Later, police spotted Buster's SUV heading east on I-20 and followed it into Alabama. The chase ended when the girlfriend shot and killed Sandra and then herself, McMillian said.
News reports at the time of the murder-suicide identified Sandra as a teacher of special needs students.
In August 2015, Buster Barnett filed a petition to probate Sandra's will. Soon after, Sandra's sister, Donna Brooks, filed her own petition to probate the will. Brooks sought to invoke the “Slayer Statute” to disqualify the husband from taking charge of his wife's estate.
“In her petition, Brooks argued that Buster and Brown had been having an affair for over two years and lived together for several months prior to Sandra's murder and that Brown was driving Buster's car when she kidnapped Sandra,” McMillian said. “Brooks further alleged that Buster deceived Sandra until her death in order to avoid dividing their marital assets; that he was aware that Brown suffered from mental illness and had violent and suicidal tendencies; and that he conspired with Brown to have Sandra murdered.”
Buster Barnett argued that he did not kill his wife or conspire with anyone to kill her, McMillian said.
James Greason of Stone Mountain represented Brooks. Greason could not be reached for comment.
Joseph Todd of Jonesboro represented Buster Barnett.
“He had nothing to do with it,” Todd said Thursday regarding the kidnapping and murder-suicide. Todd said the couple's property and money were in the husband's name and that the probate claim from Sandra's family was an attempt to gain access to his estate.
“It looked like a money grab,” Todd said. “That's the only reason for it—to get his money.”
Georgia Supreme Court precedent “requires some form of judicial condemnation to divest a murderer or his or her interests from the murdered decedent's estate,” McMillian said, citing Levenson v. Word, 286 Ga. 114, 116 (686 SE2d 236) (2009).
“Here, it is undisputed that there has been no criminal conviction or civil proceeding establishing by clear and convincing evidence that Buster participated in the kidnapping and murder of his wife,” McMillian said. “No evidence has been presented that Buster knew about Brown's plans to kidnap Sandra, that he encouraged her to do so, or that he had done anything else to make himself a party to Brown's criminal acts. Without more, the probate court correctly granted summary judgment to Buster, and we must affirm.”
The case is Estate of Sandra Barnett, No. A18A1969.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLitigators of the (Past) Week: Tackling a $4.7 Billion Verdict Post-Trial for the NFL in 'Sunday Ticket' Antitrust Litigation
Take-Two's Pete Welch on 'Getting the Best Results While Getting in the Way the Least'
Litigators of the Week: Kirkland Beats Videogame Copyright Claim From Lebron James' Tattoo Artist
Trending Stories
- 1Gibbons Reps Asylum Seekers in $6M Suit Over 2018 ‘Inhumane’ Immigration Policy
- 2DC Judge Chutkan Allows Jenner's $8M Unpaid Legal Fees Lawsuit to Proceed Against Sierra Leone
- 3Internal Whistleblowing Surged Globally in 2024, so Why Were US Numbers Flat?
- 4In Resolved Lawsuit, Jim Walden Alleged 'Retaliatory' Silencing by X of His Personal Social Media Account
- 5Government Attorneys Face Reassignment, Rescinded Job Offers in First Days of Trump Administration
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250