Failure To Provide The Appellate Court With An Adequate Record Doomed Self-Represented Son’s Appeal.
In Estate of Greer, Case No. C087492 (3rd Dist., December 21, 2020) (unpublished), decedent’s will gave his entire estate to the trustee of his trust – with his son and stepdaughter each being a fifty percent beneficiary – and appointed his son and stepdaughter as co-executors.
Son had lived with decedent in decedent’s home and continued to live there after decedent passed. When son filed a petition for letters of administration, he claimed decedent had died intestate and had partially revoked his trust for the purpose of allowing his real property to pass to son through intestate succession. Stepdaughter objected and filed a petition for probate of decedent’s will. The probate court determined the will was valid, admitted it to probate, denied son’s petition, and appointed stepdaughter as executor after determining son and stepdaughter were unable to work together. Additionally, the probate court partially granted stepdaughter’s Prob. Code § 850 petition – requiring son to vacate decedent’s home, surrender decedent’s property, pay $10,200 in unpaid rent to the estate (reduced from $20,400 because son was a 50% beneficiary) and imposed a penalty against son of $5,075 under Prob. Code § 859 for son’s bad faith possession of the estate property. Finally, the probate court awarded administration costs, some reimbursements to son and stepdaughter, $7,605.83 to stepdaughter as executor, plus $7,605.83 in fees for her attorney and an additional $13,447.50, pursuant to Prob. Code § 10811, in attorney fees for “extraordinary services” for litigation on son’s various motions, services related to the sale of decedent’s home, and litigation on the § 850 petition – all of which the probate court found went beyond the scope of a typical probate proceeding.
Son appealed, but forfeited arguments and limited the appellate panel’s ability to review the case by providing an incomplete record on appeal – with no reporter’s transcript and key evidentiary items excluded from the record. Although son represented himself, “[p]ro. per. litigants are held to the same standards as attorneys.” Kobayashi v. Superior Court (2009) 175 Cal.App.4th 536, 543 (2009). The probate court’s judgment was affirmed.
Comments