Conservatorship of Karen Lea Holmes

Case Number

22PR00530

Case Type

Hearing Date / Time

Tue, 04/30/2024 - 09:00

Nature of Proceedings

First Accounting and Report

Tentative Ruling

Probate Notes:

Appearances required.

Discrepancy no. 1 – The Schedule titled “Assets Discharged and Other Credits” is nonsensical and not a proper schedule pursuant to the Probate Code. It appears petition may have meant for the schedule to be the Probate Code section 1063(b) schedule “Changes in Form of Assets.”  If so, the schedule is not in the proper format and does not properly tract what happened to the assets.  It also appears the schedule may unnecessarily include transfers between accounts.  Transfers between conservatorship cash accounts need not be reported. (See Prob. Code, § 1063, subd. (b).)

Discrepancy no. 2 – Several unusual expenditures were not explained.  A supplement to the petition must be filed explaining the following unusual expenditures, including the nature and purpose of the expenditure in sufficient detail to allow the court to analyze the necessity of the expenditure (Prob. Code, § 1064(a)(2)):

• Multiple dates – “The exchange” – various amounts
• 6/7/2023 – Elizabeth Appraisals - $5,317 (provide invoice)

Discrepancy no. 3 –  Costs request does not comply with Rules of Court.  Petitioner requests $9,359 ($779.92/month) for conservator fees based on formulas that have nothing to do with actual work performed/time spent administering the conservatorship estate.  This is normally tolerated by the court because the fee requests are usually small.  Larger fee requests, however, requires justification by the submission of actual time sheets reflecting the time spent on the conservatorship administration.

All petitions for orders fixing and allowing compensation must comply with the requirements of rule 7.702 concerning petitions for extraordinary compensation in decedents' estates, to the extent applicable to guardianships and conservatorships, except that the best interest of the ward or conservatee is to be considered instead of the interest of beneficiaries of the estate. CRC 7.751(b)

According to CRC, Rule 7.756:

(a) The court may consider the following nonexclusive factors in determining just and reasonable compensation for a conservator from the estate of the conservatee or a guardian from the estate of the ward:

(1)  The size and nature of the conservatee's or ward's estate;

(2)  The benefit to the conservatee or ward, or his or her estate, of the conservator's or guardian's services;

(3)  The necessity for the services performed;

(4)  The conservatee's or ward's anticipated future needs and income;

(5)  The time spent by the conservator or guardian in the performance of services;

(6)  Whether the services performed were routine or required more than ordinary skill or judgment;

(7)  Any unusual skill, expertise, or experience brought to the performance of services;

(8)  The conservator's or guardian's estimate of the value of the services performed; and

(9)  The compensation customarily allowed by the court in the community where the court is located for the management of conservatorships or guardianships of similar size and complexity.

(b) No single factor listed in (a) should be the exclusive basis for the court's determination of just and reasonable compensation.

Court Investigator’s report

The court investigator’s report has been received and recommends that the conservatorship continue.