Hunter v. Craft
Decision Date | 25 September 1979 |
Docket Number | B,No. P-48-76,No. 944,944,P-48-76 |
Citation | 287 Or. 465,600 P.2d 415 |
Parties | Louise E. HUNTER, Petitioner, Respondent/Cross-appellant, v. Clifford CRAFT, Personal Representative and Proponent, Petitioner, Clinton R. Hunter, Contestant, Respondent/Cross-appellant, John C. Hunter Greene, Carol L. Hunter, Lucille O'Brien, Shriner's Hospital for Crippled Children, Jackson County Chapter of the American Red Cross, Ashland Lodgeenevolent and Protective Order of Elks of Ashland, Oregon, Lawrence L. Clark, Mrs. Alfred (Rose) Greene or Alfred Greene, Monague Hunter, and B. J. Holland, Heirs and Devisees. ; CA 9254; SC 26090. . * |
Court | Oregon Supreme Court |
Thomas C. Howser, Ashland, argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the brief were Ronald K. Cue, and Cottle, Howser & Hampton, Ashland.
Joel B. Reeder, Medford, argued the cause and filed a brief for respondent-cross/appellant Louise E. Hunter.
John W. Eads, Jr., Medford, argued the cause for respondent/cross-appellant Clinton R. Hunter. On the brief were Karen C. Allan, and Frohnmayer, Deatherage, Foster & Purdy, Medford.
Appellant Clifford Craft petitions this court for review of a Court of Appeals order denying attorney fees and expenses he incurred on appeal in Hunter v. Craft, 37 Or.App. 545, 588 P.2d 617 (1978).
This case involves a will contest in which Clifford Craft, as the personal representative named in the will of George Hunter, petitioned for probate of the will. Louise Moon Hunter, decedent's widow, petitioned to have the will declared revoked by operation of ORS 112.305 1 and requested distribution of the entire estate to her as the sole intestate heir. Clinton Hunter also asserted that the will was revoked by operation of ORS 112.305, that he was the decedent's son, and that he was entitled to an intestate share of the distribution.
The trial court decreed that the will was revoked by the subsequent marriage of the testator, that the decedent died intestate, that Clinton Hunter was not the son of decedent, and that Craft should be awarded attorney fees and expenses. Craft appealed the refusal of the trial court to admit the will to probate, Louise Moon Hunter cross-appealed the award of attorney fees and litigation expenses to Craft, and Clinton Hunter cross-appealed the denial of his petition to share in distribution of the estate.
The Court of Appeals held that the will was revoked by the subsequent marriage of the decedent, reversed the trial court's denial of Clinton Hunter's petition to share in the distribution, and affirmed the trial court's award to Craft of attorney fees and litigation expenses incurred in the trial court.
Even though unsuccessful in the Court of Appeals, Craft filed a motion for attorney fees and other expenses incurred incident to the appeal. Craft's motion was denied by the Court of Appeals, without opinion. Review was requested and granted on but one issue: Where a personal representative in good faith unsuccessfully prosecutes an appeal from the denial of a petition to admit a will to probate, is the personal representative entitled to recover necessary expenses and attorney fees incurred on appeal? We answer this question in the affirmative.
Craft claims entitlement to necessary expenses and attorney fees under a line of cases culminating with In re Feehely's Estate, 182 Or. 246, 187 P.2d 156 (1947), and under ORS 116.183(2), which provides:
"A personal representative who defends or prosecutes any proceeding in good faith and with just cause, whether successful or not, is entitled to receive from the estate his necessary expenses and disbursements, including reasonable attorney fees, in the proceeding."
The other parties resist Craft's petition for costs and attorney fees, citing Adair v. McAtee, 236 Or. 391, 385 P.2d 621, 388 P.2d 748 (1964); In re Carlson's Estate, 156 Or. 597, 68 P.2d 119 (1937); In re Shepherd's Estate, 152 Or. 15, 41 P.2d 444, 49 P.2d 448 (1935).
They also claim that there was no "just cause" for pressing the appeal, and that the costs and attorney fees sought are not reasonable.
Oregon Cases Allowing Attorney Fees to Personal
Representative on Appeal
In a number of cases we have held that a personal representative, in defending a will offered for probate in good faith, is entitled to recover his expenses and attorney fees both in the trial court and on appeal, even though unsuccessful.
As early as 1926, in In re Will of Hough, 120 Or. 223, 227, 251 P. 711, 712 (1926), we held:
Relative to the duty of the personal representative, we stated in In re Shepherd's Estate, 152 Or. 15, 42-43, 41 P.2d 444, 49 P.2d 448, 454 (1935):
However, costs and expenses of the personal representative were not allowed in In re Carlson's Estate, 156 Or. 597, 605, 68 P.2d 119, 123 (1937), because the personal representative was "seeking to sustain a will which he did not honestly believe was the deceased's last (will)."
In re Feehely's Estate, 182 Or. 246, 187 P.2d 156 (1947), involved an estate in which the executor claimed attorney fees for appealing the denial of a petition for the sale of real property in the estate. The executor's appeal was unsuccessful.
The statute then in effect, OCLA § 19-1009, provided:
"An executor or administrator shall be allowed, in the settlement of his account, all necessary expenses incurred in the care, management, and settlement of the estate, including reasonable attorney fees in any necessary litigation or matter requiring legal advice or counsel. * * *."
The Court held (182 Or. at 256-57, 187 P.2d at 160):
* * *."
The court held that the expenses incurred by the executor in prosecuting the appeal "were properly chargeable upon the estate fund."
And in Hofen v. U. S. National Bank et al, 215 Or. 603, 608, 335 P.2d 86, 88 (1959), we awarded "reasonable disbursements * * *, including a reasonable attorney's fee" to a losing executor on appeal. In that case, the executor had prevailed in the trial court.
Attorney fees on appeal were claimed in Adair v. McAtee, 236 Or. 391, 385 P.2d 621, 388 P.2d 748 (1964), pursuant to a contract containing a provision that "in case suit or action is instituted to collect said sum or any part thereof, purchaser promises to pay such additional sum as the Court may adjudge reasonable as Attorney's fees in such suit or action." We examined earlier Oregon cases involving the award of attorney fees on appeal, and acknowledge that they were "in hopeless confusion." 236 Or. at 394, 388 P.2d 748, 749. We resolved that confusion by adopting the rule that in the absence of a statute or contractual provision which specifically granted the right to attorney fees on appeal we would not award attorney fees on appeal. We neither cited nor discussed any of the probate cases discussed above.
Since Adair, we have adhered to the rule that unless an applicable statute expressly provides for attorney fees on appeal no award of attorney fees will be made, 2 but we have not (since Adair ) addressed the issue of whether attorney fees should be allowed to a personal representative who unsuccessfully prosecutes an appeal.
Legislative History of ORS 116.183(2)
Revisions to the Oregon Probate Code were made in 1969. Or.Laws 1969, ch. 591. Section 185 included what is now ORS 116.183(2). It does not expressly provide for attorney fees on appeal.
Louise Moon Hunter and Clifton Hunter argue that Adair prohibits an award of attorney fees. The failure of the 1969 legislative amendments to...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Kidney Ass'n of Oregon, Inc. v. Ferguson
...and with just cause. Thus, the trial court did not err in making the attorney fees award for Nepom's services. 12 See Hunter v. Craft, 287 Or. 465, 600 P.2d 415 (1979). Finally, KAO contends that there was insufficient proof to support Nepom's fee, because he failed to keep time records. OR......
-
Davis' Estate, Matter of
...the death of one of the parties. Hunter v. Craft, 37 Or.App. 545, 550-551, 588 P.2d 617 (1978), reversed on other grounds 287 Or. 465, 600 P.2d 415 (1979). A void marriage, on the other hand, is invalid from the outset and may be challenged by third parties. Garrett v. Chapman, 252 Or. 361,......
-
Unger's Estate, Matter of, 129465
...fiduciary duty to defend what he honestly believes to be the valid last will of the decedent. As the court stated in Hunter v. Craft, 287 Or. 465, 469, 600 P.2d 415 (1979), quoting In re Shepherd's Estate, 152 Or. 15, 42-43, 41 P.2d 444, 49 P.2d 448 " 'Under the procedure which has been ado......
-
Smith v. U.S. Nat. Bank of Oregon
...representative is charged, may weigh against an appeal and thus become adverse to the attorney's personal interest. In Hunter v. Craft, 287 Or. 465, 600 P.2d 415 (1979), the court, in holding that a personal representative who prosecutes an appeal in good faith may recover necessary expense......