27 N.E.3d 1089
Ind. Ct. App.2015Background
- Moeder established the Mary Ruth Moeder Trust in 1997 and became successor trustee in 2006; Salin Bank & Trust Co. became trustee in 2006 and pursued an accounting and resignation as trustee.
- Trust assets included a heavy JPMorgan Chase concentration (about 85% of assets) and a plan was later devised to diversify over 2007–2008.
- Moeder objected to Salin’s accounting, asserting imprudent investment decisions under the Indiana Uniform Prudent Investor Act.
- Salin reduced JPM stock by selling 7,000 shares in 2007, with further sales in 2009–2011 to diversify.
- The probate court approved Salin’s accounting, found Moeder’s objections time-barred or unsupported, and ordered Moeder to pay Salin’s attorney’s fees and costs; Moeder appealed.
- On appeal, the court affirmed the provisions of the accounting, the fee award, and rejected Moeder’s challenge to the continuance and findings; Salin sought appellate fees which were denied.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the continuance was an abuse of discretion | Moeder contends the one-day delay prejudiced her case | Salin argues continuance prudent due to judge’s familiarity | No abuse; continuance reasonable |
| Whether the findings support the judgment | Moeder claims findings are clearly erroneous | Salin argues findings supported by record | Findings not clearly erroneous; support judgment |
| Whether the fee award was proper under Indiana law | Moeder argues award was improper or excessive | Salin contends fees were reasonable and warranted | Fees awarded were not an abuse of discretion |
| Whether the amount of attorney’s fees payable by Moeder was proper | Moeder challenges the $106,001.28 figure | Salin argues reasonableness given defense costs | Court did not abuse discretion; amount supported by record |
| Whether appellate attorney’s fees should be awarded | Moeder notes personal liability risks of appellate fees | Salin seeks appellate fees for frivolous appeal | Appellate fees denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Purcell v. Old Nat’l Bank, 972 N.E.2d 835 (Ind. 2012) (multilevel review of attorney’s fees awards)
- Branham Corp. v. Newland Res., LLC, 17 N.E.3d 979 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) (frivolous/groundless standard for fees; not solely on merits)
- Charles Downey Family Ltd. P’ship v. S & V Liquor, Inc., 880 N.E.2d 322 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (disjunctive grounds for fee award; one ground suffices)
- Massey v. St. Joseph Bank & Trust Co., 411 N.E.2d 751 (Ind. Ct. App. 1980) (standard for reviewing nonjuries and evidentiary support)
- Orr v. Turco Mfg. Co., 512 N.E.2d 151 (Ind. 1987) (extreme restraint in appellate fee awards; meritless appeals)