The decedent was survived by her incapacitated son, for whom the decedent had previously been appointed guardian. Following the decedent’s death, there was protracted litigation regarding the estate, a related trust, and the guardianship, which spanned four years.
At the conclusion of the litigation, the attorneys involved submitted fee applications, seeking to be awarded payment for their legal fees and expenses.
The trial judge determined that the “lodestar” hourly rate that would be applied for each of the attorneys would be $300 per hour. The judge then made a blanket award of fees to all of the attorneys, multiplying the hourly rate “by the number[] of hours expended or what number of hours could reasonably be expended or expected to be expended in this type of litigation.” She issued two fee orders, determining that the total “reasonable number of hours expended” by each attorney was 30 hours, even though one of the attorneys expended 790 hours of work; another firm expended over 300 hours of work; and a third expended 93 hours.
Reconsideration motions were denied, and the various attorneys appealed.
Although recognizing that fee awards are disturbed on appeal “only on the rarest occasions, and then only because of a clear abuse of discretion,” the appeals court reversed and remanded the case. It accepted the $300 “lodestar” rate as reasonable, but found that,
The judge’s decision to accredit barely a fraction of the time spent on this complicated and prolonged case to each of these firms and attorneys was an unreasonable determination, and an abuse of judicial discretion.
Moreover, because the trial court had failed to make specific findings as to the reason for her blanket award, or for the number of hours she determined was “reasonable,” the Appellate Division remanded the case for reconsideration.
The appellate court also noted that the fee award appeared to be decided in part on an “impermissible basis” because the judge imposed her own policy considerations to reduce the award: she had indicated that she would not allow the trust established for son to be depleted by legal fees because it was intended to support the son, but the record lacked information regarding the value of the estate or the cost of the son’s needs.
A copy of In re Simon can be found here – In re Simon
For additional information concerning probate litigation and will contests, visit:
Categories
- Affordable Care Act
- Alzheimer's Disease
- Arbitration
- Attorney Ethics
- Attorneys Fees
- Beneficiary Designations
- Blog Roundup and Highlights
- Blogs and Blogging
- Care Facilities
- Caregivers
- Cemetery
- Collaborative Family Law
- Conservatorships
- Consumer Fraud
- Contempt
- Contracts
- Defamation
- Developmental Disabilities
- Discovery
- Discrimination Laws
- Doctrine of Probable Intent
- Domestic Violence
- Elder Abuse
- Elder Law
- Elective Share
- End-of-Life Decisions
- Estate Administration
- Estate Litigation
- Estate Planning
- Events
- Family Law
- Fiduciary
- Financial Exploitation of the Elderly
- Funeral
- Future of the Legal Profession
- Geriatric Care Managers
- Governmental or Public Benefit Programs
- Guardianship
- Health Issues
- Housing for the Elderly and Disabled
- In Remembrance
- Insolvent Estates
- Institutional Liens
- Insurance
- Interesting New Cases
- Intestacy
- Law Firm News
- Law Firm Videos
- Law Practice Management / Development
- Lawyers and Lawyering
- Legal Capacity or Competancy
- Legal Malpractice
- Legal Rights of the Disabled
- Liens
- Litigation
- Mediation
- Medicaid Appeals
- Medicaid Applications
- Medicaid Planning
- Annuities
- Care Contracts
- Divorce
- Estate Recovery
- Family Part Non-Dissolution Support Orders
- Gifts
- Life Estates
- Loan repayments
- MMMNA
- Promissory Notes
- Qualified Income Trusts
- Spousal Refusal
- Transfers For Reasons Other Than To Qualify For Medicaid
- Transfers to "Caregiver" Child(ren)
- Transfers to Disabled Adult Children
- Trusts
- Undue Hardship Provision
- Multiple-Party Deposit Account Act
- New Cases
- New Laws
- News Briefs
- Newsletters
- Non-Probate Assets
- Nursing Facility Litigation
- Personal Achievements and Awards
- Personal Injury Lawsuits
- Probate
- Punitive Damages
- Reconsideration
- Retirement Benefits
- Reverse Mortgages
- Section 8 Housing
- Settlement of Litigation
- Social Media
- Special Education
- Special Needs Planning
- Surrogate Decision-Making
- Taxation
- Technology
- Texting
- Top Ten
- Trials
- Trustees
- Uncategorized
- Veterans Benefits
- Web Sites and the Internet
- Webinar
- Writing Intended To Be A Will
Vanarelli & Li, LLC on Social Media