[WSBAPT] disqualifying a named personal representative

[Tom Stuen]

Dewey:  The conflict of interest should disqualify the son.  If you need a
cost-effective PR, try Stephanie Inslee or Cindy Maxwell.

                The cost-effective method might be a pre-litigation
mediation to divide the small estate.  Then, the heirs could sign a small
estate affidavit.

Tom

 

From: wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com
[mailto:wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of Dewey Weddle
Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2014 12:34 PM
To: WSBA Probate & Trust Listserv
Subject: [WSBAPT] disqualifying a named personal representative

 

O Wise Ones,

 

Incapacitated person, subject of guardianship, passed away last week.  Will
named her daughter (now deceased) as PR, and her son as First Alternate.
Estate estimated to be less than $10K.    

 

I represent guardian, who is deceased's granddaughter.  Guardian, son, and
others are beneficiaries of the estate.  Long history of strife between son,
who was removed as attorney-in-fact when guardianship was established 5
years ago, and guardian.  (Guardian is protected by a DVPO of 25 years
duration because of son's conduct [death threats, smashing out windshield of
guardian's car]).  Son, with the assistance of a pro bono attorney from the
local Volunteer Lawyer Program, has dragged guardian into court many times
over the last two years, with one issue recently decided by the Court of
Appeals.  Son has lost every time and has been twice sanctioned by the
Superior Court.  He presently owes the estate between $3,000 and $4,000 as a
result of those sanctions, and has no apparent ability to pay (chronically
unemployed and believed to be living on disability benefits).

 

I am looking for authority or suggestions as to how I might have the
guardian appointed to administer the estate.  RCW 11.88.150 (2) allows a
guardian to petition to transfer a guardianship to a probate proceeding
under some circumstances when the decedent dies intestate, but that is not
the case here.  Son does not appear to be disqualified under the statute to
act as PR, because he is not a felon or has not been convicted of a crime
involving moral turpitude (unless his convictions for violations of the DVPO
count as moral turpitude).  Case law supports the proposition that the
statute is not exclusive, and that a court can refuse to appoint a named
personal representative for other reasons.  I can think of many equitable
arguments to have the son disqualified and to have the guardian administer
what remains of this small estate, but I am also hoping that some of you
might have some suggestions.  Of particular interest to me, does the fact
that the son owes the estate money (and in fact has judgments against him)
disqualify him to act as PR?  Seems to be a glaring conflict of interest to
me.  I also do not think he is bondable. 

 

Having an independent administrator appointed is not a viable option because
payments to that person would essentially result in nothing left to
distribute.        

 

Best regards to all, and thanks in advance for your thoughts,

 

Dewey

 

Law Office of Dewey W. Weddle, PLLC
909 7th Street
Anacortes, WA  98221

 

Telephone  360-293-3600
Fax        360-293-3700

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20141216/601e50b7/attachment.html>