Probate: Intestate Estate Co-Administrators/Beneficiaries, Defending An Appeal By Which Distribution Of Assets Denied To Certain Claimed Beneficiaries, Justified Compensation For Appellate Fee Work Incurred By Them

Common Fund Doctrine Or Expenses Of Administration Theory Justified Compensation.

            In Estate of Ochoa, Case No. A150018 (1^st Dist., Div. 2 Aug. 27, 3019) (unpublished), a dispute arose involving intestate inheritance rights between statutory heirs of the decedent and siblings of the decedent’s predeceased spouse erupted, with the probate court determining the estate should be distributed to the decedent’s heirs.  Respondents were co-administrators of the estate and decedent’s niece and nephew, contesting the objections by the siblings of the predeceased spouse.  Respondents petitioned the lower court to have the estate pay for their attorney’s efforts in defending against the appeal (which was affirmed on the merits eventually), a request which was denied.

            The appellate court reversed the fee reimbursement request from the estate.  Respondents represented the interests of all decedent’s heirs, given that the unsuccessful objections to the estate distribution would have reduced the total inheritance to those heirs by half.  So, respondents—even though they too were beneficiaries—maintained a benefit for many other heirs, such that the common fund doctrine supported awarding appellate fees to respondents.  Furthermore, in line with Estate of Stauffer, 53 Cal.2d 124, 132 (1959), the fees were also compensable as administration expenses given that total estate property was involved.  So, the matter was remanded to the lower court to determine the amount of appellate attorney’s fees to be paid by the estate for respondents’ successful defense on appeal.