Estate of Blevins CA4/1
D067653
Cal. Ct. App.Apr 1, 2016Background
- Sonja Blevins (mother) and her minor daughters Bailey and Heather settled wrongful-death claims with the City of San Diego that provided periodic payments to each minor payable to “Sonja Blevins as Guardian of the Estate” during minority; the City could fund payments via annuities issued to Tower/MetLife.
- Probate guardian petitions were filed and Sonja was appointed guardian of the minors’ estates; inventories and accountings listed the periodic payments and structured-settlement annuity interests as guardianship assets (with later corrections by Sonja asserting some annuities were not guardianship property).
- Sonja later sought to terminate the guardianships and dispense with further accountings, arguing the structured settlements were not guardianship assets and that the guardianships were unnecessary.
- The probate court appointed Parisa Weiss as guardian ad litem (GAL) for Heather; Weiss investigated, met Heather, recommended denial of Sonja’s petition, and requested fees from the guardianship estate.
- The probate court denied Sonja’s petition, held the periodic payments (even if funded by annuities) were guardianship assets the court must protect, ordered an accounting of periodic payments, and awarded the GAL reduced attorney’s fees; Sonja appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Sonja's Argument | Respondents' Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of appeal | Notice of appeal timely; Perna’s notice of entry lacked required proof of service so 180-day period applies | Perna served notice of entry on Dec. 2, 2014, triggering 60-day appeal period | Perna’s notice of entry was not shown to include proof of service; appeal was timely under 180-day rule |
| Whether guardianships were intended part of settlement | Structured annuities were not guardianship property; settlements did not require guardianships; inventories later corrected to delete annuities | Settlement documents, petitions to approve, and approval orders explicitly structured minors’ periodic payments to be paid to guardian of estate | Court properly found periodic payments were intended for minors during minority and subject to guardianship protection; denial of termination affirmed |
| Whether prior counsel’s accounting errors or malpractice should undo fee awards | Counsel’s alleged errors/malpractice made fee awards improper or excessive given small estate | Guardianship necessity and work performed justified prior fee awards; size of estate is relevant but not dispositive | Court did not abuse discretion in refusing to modify prior attorney fee awards |
| GAL’s appointment and fee award | Weiss conflicted, report unreliable, fees excessive relative to small estate | Weiss properly appointed under Prob. Code §1003; she investigated, reported, and fees were reduced by court given small estate | GAL appointment and reduced fee award were reasonable and within court’s discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- Orthopedic Systems, Inc. v. Schlein, 202 Cal.App.4th 529 (2011) (appellate statement-of-facts standard: view facts in light most favorable to appealed order)
- Guardianship of Vaughn, 207 Cal.App.4th 1055 (2012) (substantial-evidence standard for factual findings in guardianship appeals)
- Thiara v. Pacific Coast Khalsa Diwan Society, 182 Cal.App.4th 51 (2010) (notice-of-entry proof-of-service requirement triggers 60-day appeal period)
- Conservatorship of Levitt, 93 Cal.App.4th 544 (2001) (estate size relevant but not determinative in assessing reasonableness of guardian/attorney fees)
- Estate of Meritt, 98 Cal.App.2d 70 (1950) (standards for awarding attorney fees from estate funds)