Probate: $1.867 Million Probate Fee Award To A Prevailing Party Was No Abuse Of Discretion Based On Complexity Of The Case

Fee Entitlement Existed Under Probate Code Sections 21351 And 17211.

            In Estate of Ashlock, Case Nos. F076941 et al. (5^th 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 May 3, 2019) (unpublished), a prevailing party in a complex probate case with high stakes was awarded $1.867 million out of a requested $2.885 million, which included a positive 1.5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 was aghast and appealed, but no different result followed.

            With respect to the argument that the appeal was not timely filed under CRC 3.1702(a), the Fifth District agreed with prevailing party that those deadlines did not apply to probate cases, but any error was harmless because the lower court had good cause to extend the deadline filing date anyway.

            Losing party argued a statement of decision was required on the fee issues, but that was dismissed because it is not the case under existing California law.

            Fee entitlement bases did exist for a fee award. Because losing party was a drafter of the germane trust and a putative beneficiary, Probate Code section 21351(d), (e)(1) did have a statutory fee provision applying to this same situation where there was fraud/undue influence by the trust drafter. Beyond that, Probate Code section 17211, a statutory fee provision relating to trustee challenges, was intertwined with other issues so as to provide a second basis for fee entitlement.

            The billing records provided adequate substantiation, with losing party failing to raise the proper hearsay objection that the records were not properly authenticated as business records.

            Finally, the lodestar and multiplier awards by the lower court was not erroneous, with this opinion having a good survey of multipliers in complex cases.