Estate of Rule
Petitioner and appellant James Keenan (Keenan), who served until 2004 as the administrator of the Estate of Paul Rule, deceased ("Rule's Estate"), filed his amended final account and petition for settlement of the estate and allowance of fees, under Probate Code[1] section 1060 et seq. (the amended account). Objections were filed by the current administrator, respondent and objector Betty Rule (Objector or Betty Rule, mother of Paul Rule). The probate court conducted a bench trial in 2008 on the disputed issues identified by the parties in their joint trial statement. The probate court's September 16, 2010 order surcharged Keenan over $1.9 million for his breaches of care and fiduciary duty that took place while he was acting as independent administrator of the Rule Estate. The court approved, only in part, his amended account, while deferring final settlement of the estate until further proceedings were conducted on the requests to allow fees (not involved in this appeal). Keenan's motion for new trial was denied.
Keenan appeals the orders imposing the surcharges and partially approving the amended account. (§ 1300, subd. (g) [surcharge order appealable]; Code Civ. Proc., § 904.1, subd. (a)(2) [denial of new trial, appealable order].) Keenan contends the probate court utilized an incorrect burden of proof standard, and further, that insufficient evidence supported the imposition of the surcharges as remedies for his breaches of fiduciary duty and the applicable standard of care in his administration of Rule's Estate. A large portion of his Rule Estate administration was carried out while Keenan was participating in his personal bankruptcy reorganization proceedings, beginning in 1996, in which Rule's Estate was an alleged creditor and debtor.[2]
Comments on Estate of Rule