Estate of Boatman v. Boatman (In re Estate of Boatman)

• Decision Date: 10 May 2021
• Docket Number: c/w No. 81201-7-I,c/w No. 81202-5-I,c/w No. 81200-9-I,c/w No. 81000-6-I,No. 80933-4-I,80933-4-I
• Court: Washington Court of Appeals
• Parties: In the Matter of the Estate of BOJILINA H. BOATMAN. THE ESTATE OF BOJILINA H. BOATMAN, Appellant/Cross Respondent, v. BRIAN BOATMAN, Individually and as Trustee of the Brian Boatman Revocable Living Trust, Respondent/Cross Appellant, BEVERLY YOUNG, Appellant.

In the Matter of the Estate of BOJILINA H. BOATMAN.

THE ESTATE OF BOJILINA H. BOATMAN, Appellant/Cross Respondent,
v.
BRIAN BOATMAN, Individually and as Trustee of
the Brian Boatman Revocable Living Trust, Respondent/Cross Appellant,
BEVERLY YOUNG, Appellant.

No. 80933-4-I
c/w No. 81000-6-I
c/w No. 81200-9-I
c/w No. 81201-7-I
c/w No. 81202-5-I

COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DIVISION ONE

May 10, 2021

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO PUBLISH

The respondent, Brian Boatman, has filed a motion to publish. The appellant, Beverly Young, has filed an answer. A majority of the panel has reconsidered its prior determination not to publish the opinion filed for the above entitled matter on May 10, 2021 finding that it is of precedential value and should be published. Now, therefore, it is

ORDERED that the motion to publish is granted; it is further

Page 2

ORDERED that the written opinion filed May 10, 2021 shall be published and printed in the Washington Appellate Reports.

/s/_________
Judge

Page 3

UNPUBLISHED OPINION

APPELWICK, J. — This consolidated appeal arises from attorney fees and costs awarded in favor of Brian Boatman in a Trust and Estate Dispute Resolution Act¹ (TEDRA) action against the Estate and against Young, its personal representative. Young asserts the trial court erred in awarding costs and attorney fees in favor of Brian Boatman and against Young. She asserts the trial court erred in denying her motion to vacate the order as void. The Estate asserts the trial court erred in the amount of costs and attorney fees awarded in favor of Brian Boatman and argues no award should have been entered against either the Estate or

Page 4

Young. Brian asserts the trial court erred in declining to find the other Boatman siblings were parties and find them jointly and severally liable with the Estate and Young for the awarded costs and attorney fees. Both Brian and Young request attorney fees and costs on appeal. The award against Young was error. The award of costs against the Estate was error in part. The trial court did not err in denying costs and fees in favor of Brian for Phase I, against other siblings in Phase II, or in exercising its discretion in the amount of fees awarded. We affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand.

FACTS

In 2007, Bojilina Boatman began living in her son Brian Boatman's² home full-time. Brian was responsible for her care until her death in 2013. Bojilina's five other children (Boatman siblings) then filed an initial TEDRA petition against Brian seeking recovery for assets transferred from Bojilina to Brian while he was serving as her attorney-in-fact (Phase I). Brian filed a response and counterclaim as an individual and as attorney-in-fact of the estate of Bojilina Boatman (Estate) asking for attorney fees. He moved to dismiss the petition on the grounds that the Boatman siblings were not parties and had no standing to bring the action.

In 2014, the trial court dismissed the Phase I petition for lack of standing. The Boatman siblings appealed. Brian moved for an award of attorney fees, on which the court deferred ruling, pending resolution of the appeal.

Page 5

In 2016, this court affirmed the trial court's dismissal of the Boatman siblings' claims based on lack of standing. Young v. Boatman, No. 72643-9-I, slip. op. at 1 (Wash. Ct. App. Feb. 8, 2016) (unpublished), https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/726439.pdf. We explained that RCW 11.96A.030(5)'s definition of "party" includes estate beneficiaries, and under RCW 11.96A.080 any party may have a judicial proceeding related to such matters. Id. at 9-10. However, TEDRA expressly states that it doesn't supersede other provisions of Title 11 RCW. Id. at 10. And, under RCW 11.48.010, only the personal representative has the authority to maintain and prosecute actions on behalf of the Estate. Id. at 10-11. Still, we held that Brian had a conflict of interest as personal representative with respect to the Estate's pursuit of claims against him. Id. at 13-14. We ordered the trial court to appoint an interim personal representative on remand "to determine whether to pursue an action on behalf of the Estate against Brian as the attorney-in-fact for Bojilina." Id. at 14.

Following remand, the court-appointed interim personal representative issued a report concluding that a claim was warranted on behalf of the Estate against Brian as attorney-in-fact. Brian ultimately resigned as personal representative. Beverly Young, one of the Boatman siblings, was appointed by the court as personal representative of the Estate.

The Estate, with Young acting as personal representative, then filed and served a TEDRA petition against Brian (Phase II). The only parties to the Phase II petition were the Estate as the petitioner and Brian (individually and as trustee for the Brian Boatman Revocable Living Trust) as the respondent. The petition

Page 6

asked for an award of attorney fees and costs pursuant to RCW 11.96A.150. Brian answered and counterclaimed for attorney fees and costs pursuant to RCW 11.96A.150 and RCW 11.94.120.

On November 6, 2019, following a bench trial, the court entered findings of fact and conclusions of law finding in favor of Brian and denying all of the Estate's claims. It found,

Since Brian Boatman is the prevailing party, the Court HEREBY ORDERS that the Personal Representative pay Brian Boatman's attorney's fees and costs, in accordance with RCW 4.84.030. Brian Boatman's attorney shall submit a cost bill for the Court's analysis and the Court will issue an order against the Personal Representative for such fees and costs as it deems reasonable.

The Estate moved for reconsideration, arguing awards under RCW 4.84.030 are limited to allowable costs and could be imposed only against the Estate. The trial court denied the motion for reconsideration but reserved on the issue of attorney fees.

Brian then moved for entry of judgment on attorney fees and costs incurred in both TEDRA petitions. He requested fees and costs in Phase I. He also requested fees and costs in the Phase II against the Boatman siblings, or in the alternative, against Young in both her individual capacity and in her capacity as personal representative of the Estate.

On December 20, 2019, the trial court entered an order on entry of judgments for attorney fees and costs. The order concerned an award of attorney fees and costs pursuant to RCW 11.96A.150 and RCW 4.84.030. The court declined to award attorney fees related to the Phase I petition, as that was a matter

Page 7

of first impression. It...