Opinion by
Ikе Browarsky died on April 19, 1954, leaving a will under the terms of which Dr. Lewis Sheppard and Dora Foster were named executors and trustees. The will provided for devises and bequests to, among others, Dr. Lewis Sheppard, Dora Foster, and Sadie Sheppard (Dr. Sheppard’s mother, also known as Sadie Shapero Browarsky). The residuе of the estate was left to the present appellants.
After a considerable amount of litigation, a final decree of distribution was entered April 20, 1967, tо which decree the residuary beneficiaries filed exceptions designed to surcharge the co-executors, Dr. Sheppard and Dora Foster. These exceptions were dismissed by the then Orphans’ Court of Allegheny County, sitting en banc, on May 31, 1967, and this Court affirmed that decree, per curiam, on January 3, 1968. 1
Three attorneys served as counsel in opposition to the attempted surcharge of the executors, i.e.: David Janavitz, Esquire, who represented the estate and hаd held that position since testator’s death in 1954; Thomas Griggs, Esquire, who represented Lewis Sheppard as co-executor, and had been retained in July of 1966 specifically to handle the surcharge litigation; and, John Frazer, Esquire, who represented Dora Foster in her capacity as co-executrix and had been previously retained by her to pursue certain claims she had, as an individual, against the estate. After the matter of the surcharge had been disposed of, the three at *285 torneys petitioned the Orphans’ Court for the allowance of their fees to be paid by the estate, as follows: David Janavitz—$2,000; Thomas Griggs—$7,800; John Frazеr—$2,000. Because any payments by the estate would be drawn from the residue, the residuary legatees contested this petition for the allowance of feеs. The lower court granted the petition, and the instant appeal followed.
We begin our consideration with an explanation of why it was appropriate for the attorneys for the executors to seek payment of their fees from the estate. The executors were placed in the position to be sued because of duties they had performed for the estate. That being the case, it would be unjust to require them personally to bear the reasоnable costs of the defense of suits brought against them solely by reason of their positions as executors. “It is well established that whenever there is an unsuccеssful attempt by a beneficiary to surcharge a fiduciary the latter is entitled to an allowance out of the estate to pay for counsel fees аnd necessary expenditures in defending himself against the attack [citing cases].”
Wormley Estate,
The question presented to the court below involved the propriety of the
amount
of the fees requested. In
Fraiman Estate,
The residuary beneficiaries have alleged that the three attorneys improperly allocated their time in the рetition for the allowance of fees. Mr. Griggs has presented a bill for $7,800, representing 342.5 hours which were spent in defending Dr. Sheppard, as executor. Initially, we note that this is roughly a rate of $22 per hour, the minimum rate prescribed by the Bar Association in Allegheny County for 1966 and 1967. It has been claimed, however, that a large portion of these 342.5 hours was spent on matters which did not involve the defense against the surcharge attempt. There is absolutely no factual basis whatsoever which might suppоrt such an allegation.
The cause of this confusion is that, pro forma, Mr. Griggs has had three clients in this case, Dr. Sheppard as executor, Dr. Sheppard as an individual, and. Sadie Sheppard as an individual. When this action first arose, it appeared that Dr. Sheppard and his mother might be individually brought into the suit. As a matter of caution, Mr. Griggs entered his appearance аs their attorney, in addition to entering his appearance for Dr. Sheppard as executor. From that point, the matter is best clarified by Mr. Griggs’ own testimony. 2 “At a later stage of the proceedings it appeared that Mr. Dean’s efforts 3 were directed toward surcharging the Executors and, therefore, we did nothing in the рroceedings individually for Lewis A. Shepperd [sic], individually, nor for Sadie Shapero Browai'-shy [sic].” (Emphasis supplied) In short, Mr. Griggs *287 and his associates spent 342.5 hours solely in defending Dr. Sheppard, as executor, and presented a bill at a rate which was approximately the minimum fee charged in Allegheny County at that time. There is utterly no merit to the contention that this fee should not be allowed because it represents time not properly billable to the estate.
John Frazer, attorney for the other executrix, Dora Foster, has presented a bill for $2,000, whiсh represents 98 hours, or a rate of approximately $20 per hour (below the minimum fee rate). Mr. Frazer was first retained by Dora Foster on August 5, 1961, to handle claims which she, as an individual, had against the estate, based on two checks that had been given to her by the testator. When it became apparent that she might also be subjected to liability for a surcharge, due to her position as co-executrix, she chose to have Mr. Frazer protect her interests in that case alsо. Mr. Frazer and his associates had a total of 260 hours which they billed to Dora Foster’s account, and 98 of these were allocated to work done for hеr as co-executrix. Since this testimony as to allocation has not been rebutted, and since no attempt was made to attack Mr. Frazer’s credibility, we cannot find that the lower court abused its discretion in allowing this $2,000 fee.
David Janavitz had been representing the estate from its inception. When the surcharge matter arose, Mr. Griggs took over as the primary counsel for the defense of that action, with Mr. Frazer as co-counse? to aid in special questions applicable to the interests of Dora Foster, co-executrix. Quite naturally, Messrs. Griggs and Frazer relied heavily upon Mr. Janavitz’ expertise re the highly complex history of the estate to that point. In this advisory capacity, Mr. Janavitz put in well over 100 hours and has petitioned for the allowance of a $2,000 fee, less than the minimum rаte *288 referred to previously. We find the amount of such fee to be not at all excessive.
The appellants have raised a question about whether it wаs necessary for all three attorneys to be involved in this matter. Where the administration of an estate involves only
routine
matters,
Fraiman Estate,
Decree affirmed. Costs on the appellants.