Common Fund/Deadlines/Probate: Trust Beneficiaries Seeking Fees Under Common Fund Doctrine Should Have Been Allowed Something

CRC Rules on Filing Fee Motions Did Not Govern Probate Proceedings.

​The overall, convoluted probate dispute in Sheen v. Sheen, Case No. B243847 (2d Dist., Div. 8 July 1, 2014) (unpublished)—although colorful—does not involve extended discussion on the facts, although the appellate court did reverse lower court failures to award attorney’s fees to beneficiaries given undisputed benefit to the trust under the "common fund" doctrine.

​However, there are some "takeaways" from this opinion.

​The first significant point was procedural in nature. The parties resisting fee recovery claimed that the trial judge correctly ruled that CRC 3.1702.1(b)(1) time limitations barred the probate "common fund" fees request. Nope, the lower court was incorrect. Rule 3.1702.1(b)(1) applies to a civil case, not a probate case to recovery trust assets under the common fund doctrine. No go in holding these deadlines applicable in this context. (Hollaway v. Edwards, 68 Cal.App.4th 94, 98-99 (1998).)

​The second important point was that no one argued that the common fund doctrine did not justify some fees, just the amount of fees. A complete denial, under the factual circumstances, was an abuse of discretion—especially given that the adverse party did not dispute that something should be awarded.

Posted with Blogsy