In re Guardianship of Nauth, 2018 Ohio 892

In 2011 the Medina County Probate Court found Loren Nauth incompetent and appointed Shorain McGhee (the Guardian) as a third-party guardian of his person.
In 2014 Wife moved to terminate the guardianship (or substitute herself as guardian); she did not allege dereliction by the Guardian. A multi-day hearing followed; the probate court denied termination and the denial was later affirmed on appeal.
The Guardian had retained counsel for the termination hearing; the probate court initially notified that the guardianship estate would not pay trial counsel and later denied the Attorney’s motion to withdraw for nonpayment.
After the hearing the Guardian sought payment from the guardianship for (1) attorney fees for the trial work and appellate work, and (2) guardian fees for time spent; Wife opposed payment and objected to certain guardian-fee entries.
The probate court denied payment of trial attorney fees (approved appellate attorney fees), disallowed $1,350 of claimed guardian fees as a double entry, and reduced the Guardian’s future hourly rate.
On appeal the Ninth District: (a) held the probate court abused its discretion by failing to apply the three-part test from In re Wolfe/In re Allen for attorney-fee awards in termination proceedings and remanded to apply that test; and (b) affirmed the probate court’s denial of the $1,350 guardian-fee claim. The court declined to reach the Guardian’s challenge to the future-rate reduction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether probate court erred in denying attorney fees for the termination trial	McGhee: court failed to apply the three-part Wolfe/Allen test (good faith; necessities; benefit to guardianship) and should award fees	Wife: trial counsel was unnecessary/redundant and fees not merited	Court: Reversed as to attorney fees and remanded for application of the three-part test in Allen/Wolfe
Whether $1,350 in guardian fees was improperly denied as a duplicate entry	McGhee: clerical/date error—one December entry should have been November 19; fees for all hearing appearances should be paid	Wife: entries duplicate, not supported by record; time billed does not match transcripts	Court: Affirmed denial of $1,350—Guardian failed to correct/clarify dates and record did not support duplicate billing
Whether probate court showed bias or relied on outside/incorrect information to deny fees	McGhee: court exhibited passion/bias and referenced outside info and Guardian’s other employment	Wife: references related only to reducing future hourly rate; past-fee denials were based on record	Court: Declined to reach bias claim on appeal as it pertained to future-rate reduction not challenged on appeal
Standard of review for fee and guardian-fee determinations	McGhee: decisions were an abuse of discretion	Wife: probate court acted within discretion	Court: Reviews for abuse of discretion; found abuse as to attorney-fee analysis but not as to guardian-fee denial

In re Guardianship of Allen, 50 Ohio St.3d 142 (Ohio 1990) (requires three-part test for paying attorney fees from guardianship in termination proceedings)
In re Guardianship of Escola, 41 Ohio App.3d 42 (5th Dist. 1987) (abuse-of-discretion review for guardianship fee determinations)