OSC re: Appointment of Public Guardian
compensation can be sufficient to cover unexpected intricacies in estate administration]; and Estate of Hilton (1996) 44 Cal.App.4th 890, 912-16 [citing In re Walker's Estate (1963) 221 Cal.App.2d 792, 795] for the proposition that probate courts can disallow all extraordinary fees claims if they find statutory compensation sufficient, keeping in mind the legislature's policy of subsidizing fees in more complicated estates with those easily earned in less complicated estate ["The Legislature merely determined, in substance, that any undercompensation involved in handling small estates would be equitably adjusted in the long run by overcompensation in handling larger estates."].)
In this case, Petitioner claims $69,678 in extraordinary fees, on top of the $56,611.54 in statutory fees, for a combined total of $126,298.54. Not only do the extraordinary fees appear to relate primarily to work done on the sale of property, but the fee request does not take into consideration the considerable time it took to bring this estate to a close.
The Oder for Probate in this case was issued on October 7, 2022. While this was the product of a stipulation between adversarial parties vying for control of administration, the Petition for Final Distribution admits that the bulk of the contest occurred before the date of appointment. After that date, there are legitimate actions that qualify as extraordinary, but do not justify nearly $70,000 in fees...especially the real property sales. While the fees incurred to seek unlawful detainer actions are warranted, the fees incurred in merely navigating an otherwise unremarkable sales process are not warranted, and do not explain the delay in bringing this estate to a close nearly four years after administration opened.
Therefore, it is recommended the Court reduce the fee request by $42,256, for a total extraordinary fee award of $27,422.
Appearances: The court is open to the public for court business. The court is also conducting hearings via Zoom videoconference. Meeting ID: 161 956 1423 Passcode: 137305
Tentative Ruling: Conservatorship of Jade Sabrina Kinsman Tentative Ruling: Conservatorship of Jade Sabrina Kinsman Case Number
Case Type Conservatorship Hearing Date / Time Wed, 02/25/2026 - 09:30 Nature of Proceedings OSC re: Appointment of Public Guardian Tentative Ruling Probate Notes: Appearances required. Due to there being no apparent relative willing to serve as successor conservator, it is recommended the Court order notice to the Public Guardian pursuant to Probate Code section 2920(b). The proposed conservatee is expected to attend the hearing. (Prob. Code, Sec. 1825.)
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
Appearances: The court is open to the public for court business. The court is also conducting hearings via Zoom videoconference. Meeting ID: 161 956 1423