Harper v. Amov
Petitioners and appellants Paul Harper and Michael Daymude (appellants) appeal from the trial courts order denying their amended petition to fix and allow compensation to Paul Harper (Harper), successor in interest to Juanita Lane (Lane), former trustee of the Curtis W. Johnson 1992 Trust (Trust), and compensation and reimbursement for costs to Michael Daymude (Daymude), attorney for former trustee Lane. As discussed below, we conclude that the trial court acted within its discretion in denying all fees, costs and compensation to appellants. Although the former trustee Leon Amov improperly took an early distribution of Trust assets without making provisions to pay the expenses of Lanes life estate, his widow Sharon Amov remedied that error early on in the ensuing litigation. The record clearly supports the trial courts conclusions that the litigation appellants pursued during Lanes trusteeship was brought primarily for the personal benefit of Lane and/or to garner attorney fees for Daymude, rather than to benefit the Trust.
Comments on Harper v. Amov