Leestma v. Williams (In re Gleason)
| Docket Number | B320039 |
| Decision Date | 17 October 2023 |
| Parties | Estate of CAROLE GLEASON, Deceased. v. PATRICIA GLEASON WILLIAMS et al., Objectors and Appellants. JAMES L. LEESTMA, as Successor Administrator, Petitioner and Respondent, |
| Court | California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County No. 18STPB03024 Daniel Juarez, Judge.
Law Office of Michael Mogan and Michael Mogan for Objectors and Appellants.
Schindler Eyrich and John F. Eyrich for Petitioner and Respondent.
Patricia Gleason Williams and her daughter, Nakia Woodson, appeal from the probate court's order requiring them to (1) transfer real property to James L. Leestma as administrator of Carole Gleason's estate; (2) pay a surcharge of $350,000 to the estate (with a second $350,000 surcharge satisfied by reconveyance of the real property); and (3) pay attorneys' fees and costs to Leestma and two heirs-Kenji Gleason and Arthur Gleason.[1] On appeal, Williams and Woodson contend Woodson's due process rights were violated because she was not timely served with Leestma's Probate Code section 850[2] petition prior to trial, and the probate court abused its discretion in denying her request for a trial continuance. They also argue there was not substantial evidence to support the surcharges the court imposed against them for bad faith under section 859 and Williams's breach of fiduciary duty under section 9601. Further, they maintain the probate court abused its discretion in granting attorneys' fees and costs to Leestma, Kenji, and Arthur. They also object to the probate court's statement of decision. We affirm.
On September 15, 2017 Carole died without a will. Carole was survived by her four adult children: Williams, Kenji, Kevin and Paschell Gleason. Arthur is the father of the four children; at the time of Carole's death, she and Arthur were divorced. At that time, Carole owned a house located on South Hobart Boulevard in Los Angeles (Hobart property).
On May 2, 2018 the probate court granted Paschell's petition for letters of administration and appointed her the administrator of Carole's estate. In September and November 2018 Kevin executed two assignments of his interest in the estate ($18,000 each) to Advance Inheritance, LLC as consideration for two cash advances of $10,000 each. After Paschell died in January 2019, the court granted Williams's petition for letters of administration and appointed her as successor administrator on March 18, 2019.[3]
On July 24, 2019 Advance Inheritance, through its attorney James L. Leestma,[4] filed a petition to remove Williams as administrator, to require Williams to sell the Hobart property and provide an accounting, and for reimbursement of its attorneys' fees and costs. On the same date, Advance Inheritance filed a petition requesting the probate court appoint Leestma as successor administrator. On December 12, 2019 Leestma recorded a lis pendens on the Hobart property.[5]
On January 17, 2020, after hearing testimony and argument by the attorneys, the probate court removed Williams as administrator; ordered Williams to file a final accounting; granted Advance Inheritance's request for attorneys' fees and costs; and appointed Leestma as successor administrator.
On April 20, 2020 Williams filed a first account, in which she included a creditor's claim of $16,293 by Woodson, which she had allowed prior to her removal as administrator. Williams stated in her account with respect to Woodson's claim,
On August 13, 2020 Leestma, as successor administrator, filed a petition (section 850 petition) requesting the probate court (1) determine the estate's ownership of the Hobart property (§ 850, subd. (a)(2)(C) &(D)); (2) direct transfer of the Hobart property to the estate (§ 856); (3) quiet title; and (4) award double damages and attorneys' fees and costs (§ 859). Leestma argued Williams transferred the Hobart property to a trust established by Williams with no consideration and without court approval or notice of proposed action to interested parties. The section 850 petition and notice of hearing were served on Williams, Woodson, and Williams's attorney, Michael Mogan, among others.
In her September 11, 2020 response and affirmative defenses to the section 850 petition, Williams argued she conveyed the Hobart property to Certified Holding Trust "to enable a bank to lend money to such trust to make improvements on the [p]roperty to benefit all beneficiaries of the estate." Williams alleged as her fifth affirmative defense that Certified Holding Trust owned title to the Hobart property, and she sought affirmative relief to quiet title against Leestma.
On March 25, 2020 Williams filed a petition to remove Leestma as the successor administrator. In her October 20, 2020 supplement to the petition, Williams requested an evidentiary hearing to resolve her petition and Leestma's section 850 petition. She asserted, "[T]he title of the real estate was transferred to a trust to obtain bank financing such financing which was not possible while the property was in the name of the estate." She further stated that "her two siblings were well aware of her attempts to secure financing before such transfer and did not object."
On October 28, 2020 Kenji filed a verified response to Williams's supplement in support of her petition to remove Leestma as administrator in which he denied knowledge of Williams's attempts to secure financing. Kenji also stated he was not aware of Williams's transfer of the Hobart property from the probate estate to a trust and did not consent to the conveyance.
On July 9, 2021 Leestma filed a supplement to his section 850 petition, naming Woodson as a respondent in her capacity as the trustee of Certified Holding Trust. On July 22 Woodson, represented by Mogan, filed her response and affirmative defenses to the section 850 petition. Woodson stated that Williams transferred the Hobart property to the trust to obtain a loan to make improvements on the property to benefit all beneficiaries. She alleged on information and belief that Kenji and Kevin were fully aware and did not object to the transfer of title. Woodson stated further there was consideration for the conveyance because as the trustee she repaid Kevin's debt to Leestma and paid off the debt incurred to make improvements to the Hobart property. Woodson also alleged as her fifth affirmative defense that Certified Holding Trust held title to the Hobart property, and she sought affirmative relief quieting title against Leestma.
At the July 27, 2021 court trial on the section 850 petition, Leestma testified on his own behalf and called Williams and Woodson as witnesses.[6]
Williams testified that on March 19, 2019 the probate court appointed her as successor administrator of Carole's estate. Williams acknowledged she read and signed a form advising her of the duties and liabilities of a personal representative, including the duties to "'keep estate assets separate'" and to "not spend any of the estate's money unless [she] received permission from the court or [had] been advised to do so by an attorney." The form further stated that if Williams did not "obtain the court's permission when it is required [she] may be removed as personal representative or [she] may be required to reimburse the estate from [her] own personal funds, or both."
Williams testified that when she was the administrator, she spoke with Kenji and Kevin about making repairs to the Hobart property. Williams did not discuss the matter with her father (Arthur), and she opposed his petition for entitlement to the estate "[b]ecause [her] dad had stated time and again that he didn't want to have anything to do with the house."
Williams acknowledged that on April 11, 2019, as executor of Carole's estate, she signed a grant deed conveying the Hobart property to Certified Holding Trust, which Williams had created in early 2019.[7] Woodson was the trustee and sole beneficiary of the trust. Woodson, who graduated from law school but was not a licensed attorney, helped prepare the trust document for Certified Holding Trust and the grant deed conveying the Hobart property to the trust. Williams admitted the estate did not receive any consideration for the conveyance of the Hobart property to the trust. Williams denied she transferred the Hobart property, in effect, to disinherit Kevin and Kenji. She claimed "they both were aware," but she admitted she did not have the written consent of Kevin, Kenji, or Arthur to transfer the Hobart property out of the estate. Woodson testified Kevin orally consented to the transfer of the property to Certified Holding Trust because he did not have the money to pay the debt he owed to Leestma. According to Woodson, Kenji also consented to the transfer because he did not have "money to do anything."
Both Williams and Woodson testified the Hobart property was transferred to Certified Holding Trust to obtain a loan to pay for improvements to the property. Woodson applied for a loan of $371,000. She testified Williams, Kevin, and Kenji agreed to split $200,000 of the loan proceeds, with the remaining $150,000 designated for repairs of the Hobart property and $21,000 to pay off Advance Inheritance.[8] But...
To continue reading
Request your trial