Fee Entitlement Existed Under Probate Code Sections 21351 And 17211. In Estate of Ashlock, Case Nos. F076941 et al. (5th Dist. May 3, 2019) (unpublished), a prevailing party in a complex probate case with high stakes was awarded $1.867 million out of a requested $2.885 million, which included a positive 1.5 multiplier. Losing party […]
Probate Code Section 11420 Dictated, Although Appellate Court Was Disturbed By Administrator’s Counsel’s Potential Conflicts Of Interest. In Estate of Steinberg (Hooy & Hooy v. Steinberg), Case No. A150046 (1st Dist., Div. 2 April 30, 2019) (unpublished), a law firm serving as counsel for an initial administrator of a probate estate had payment of
Lower Court’s Denial of Winning Beneficiary’s Appellate Fees Reversed In This Appeal. One beneficiary in Key v. Tyler, Case No. B283979 (2d Dist., Div. 2 April 19, 2019) (published) successfully challenged a disinheriting, adverse trust amendment as being the product of undue influence by the trustee, who was also a trust beneficiary. Winning beneficiary
Nothing In General Costs Statutes Or Probate Code Section 17211 So Allows. In Ramirez v. Rue, Case Nos. B283677/B286574 (2d Dist., Div. 4 April 18, 2019) (unpublished), a trustee prevailed in a battle by co-beneficiaries challenging certain accountings. Trustee won because the probate court determined the contested accounting dispute was brought/prosecuted in bad faith and
The Trial Court’s Inconsistencies In Its Findings And A Lack of Substantial Evidence Means A New Trial Is Required To Re-Evaluate The Claims And Defenses. Miranda v. Alford, Case No. G054897 (consolidated with G055167) (4th Dist., Div. 3 March 8, 2019) (unpublished) is a case involving a man’s wife of eight years, and
His Anger Over Another Probate Dispute Was The Driving Cause So That Claimed Conservatorship Fees Were Unreasonable. Probate is one of those areas where attorney’s fees recoveries are guided, overwhelming, by equitable principles. Reaume v. Reaume, Case No. G054759/G054864 (4th Dist., Div. 3 March 12, 2019) (unpublished) well demonstrates this reality. There, one
4/3 DCA Also Determines Probate Court Section 859 Allows Doubling, But Not Trebling, Of Damages. Objector in Conservatorship of Ribal, Case No. G056105 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Jan. 18, 2019) (published) was ordered to return funds to the conservatorship and, on remand, the trial court awarded conservator post-judgment attorney’s fees incurred in attempts to
2/6 DCA Has Nice Discussion Of Similarities And Differences Between The Substantial Benefit Versus Common Fund Theories Of Fee Recovery. Generally, trust beneficiaries must pay their own attorney’s fees incurred in challenging a trustee’s conduct, even if they ultimately succeed. (Leader v. Cords, 182 Cal.App.4th 1588, 1595 (2010).) However, a court in its equitable discretion
Although Not Raised Artfully, Merits Of Objections Required An Evidentiary Hearing. Estate of Willard, Case No. 282122 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Jan. 2, 2019) (unpublished) is a case where an estate administrator of his mother’s estate did not gain any attention to his challenges to an attorney’s request for statutory and extraordinary probate fees.
Although Such Fees Should Usually Be Paid Forthwith, Probate Code Has Discretion To Defer Them For Payment Until Final Distributions Are Made. The common fund doctrine, which usually is at play in class action or probate cases, allows the person obtaining a benefit for a number of persons to be awarded attorney’s fees out
