Law Firm Failed To Cease Work As Instructed By One Of The Co-Guardians.
Probate Code § 2105(c)(1) requires that “[w]here there are two guardians or conservators, both must concur to exercise a power.” Unfortunately for the law firm seeking fees in Guardianship of the Estate of L.T., Case No. B288733 (2d Dist., Div. 5 November 22, 2019) (unpublished), it filed a legal malpractice action under authorization from only one of two co-guardians. As a result, the malpractice action had to be withdrawn, and although the law firm eventually received temporary authorization from other co-guardian to continue work, that authorization was revoked with instruction to cease work less than two weeks later – an instruction the law firm did not follow.
In the meantime, co-guardians brought in other counsel to resolve the dispute they had with their former attorney/firm. Once that dispute was resolved, the law firm that had been instructed to cease work petitioned for $64,398.75 in attorney fees and $4,145.31 in costs. The trial court denied – with its implied finding that the $10,000 retainer fee paid to the law firm to be reasonable and adequate compensation for the work performed during the time period work was authorized by both co-guardians. Everything else
The 2/5 DCA affirmed – finding substantial evidence supported the trial court’s ruling – and included a nice discussion on Cal. Rules of Court, Rules 7.751 and 7.702 (interest of ward considered instead of interest of beneficiaries of estate, and the showing required for an attorney filing a petition for extraordinary compensation) and Probate Code section 2642 (attorney providing legal services for guardian may petition for fees with court determining reasonable compensation).