[WSBAPT] WSBAPT Digest, Vol 143, Issue 10
Terry Gobel
TerryGobel at attorneyinspokane.com
Tue Aug 11 12:08:16 PDT 2026
JP Denier of Beresford - Booth in Edmunds. T Gobel
Get Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
________________________________
From: wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> on behalf of wsbapt-request at lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbapt-request at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Sent: Tuesday, 11 August 2026 12:00:03
To: wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: WSBAPT Digest, Vol 143, Issue 10
Send WSBAPT mailing list submissions to
wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbapt
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
wsbapt-request at lists.wsbarppt.com
You can reach the person managing the list at
wsbapt-owner at lists.wsbarppt.com
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of WSBAPT digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Referral for Trust Litigation (David Faber)
2. Re: WSBAPT Digest, Vol 143, Issue 7 (Marcus Fry)
3. Re: Referral for Trust Litigation (Diane Kiepe)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2026 14:54:34 -0700
From: David Faber <david at faberfeinson.com>
To: "WSBA Probate & Trust Listserv" <wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: [WSBAPT] Referral for Trust Litigation
Message-ID:
<CAKkD=wj+5AhrYb1wpnb-0qKuA4zq-wjTZ+nPzeuMfjfONbxKbA at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Hi All,
I am in need of a referral to handle some trust litigation. My client
adopted a child who is a beneficiary of a trust. The trust's "professional"
trustee has held the entire trust corpus (hundreds of thousands) in cash,
failing to invest or seek any returns on the assets in what appears to me
to be a clear breach of their fiduciary obligations under the prudent
investor rule (by my calculations over the last seven years, the trustee
could have more than doubled the value of the original trust estate simply
by investing in an S&P tracking fund, for instance). The beneficiary (and
potential client) is a young adult who is seeking (a) to remove and replace
the trustee and (b) possibly sue for damages due to the current trustee's
breach of fiduciary obligations. The client lives in Port Townsend.
Self-referrals are great!
Thank you!
Best,
David J. Faber
Faber Feinson PLLC
800 Polk Street, Suite B
Port Townsend, WA 98368
(360) 379-4110
*** NOTICE: ATTORNEY CLIENT COMMUNICATION - PRIVILEGED & CONFIDENTIAL.
This communication may contain privileged or other confidential
information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that
you have received this communication in error, please do not print,
copy, retransmit, disseminate, or otherwise use the information. Also,
please indicate to the sender that you have received this communication in
error, and destroy the copy you received.***
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20260810/ca76bfd0/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2026 22:22:18 +0000
From: Marcus Fry <MFry at hawleytroxell.com>
To: WSBA Probate & Trust Listserv <wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: Re: [WSBAPT] WSBAPT Digest, Vol 143, Issue 7
Message-ID:
<DS4PPF78EA5AEBE9487981CE471E81C9FEDCFDE2 at DS4PPF78EA5AEBE.NAMP221.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
I disagree that the requirements imposed on third party and unrelated PRs are reasonable if all the beneficiaries of an estate agree to no bond, NIP, venue selection, etc. Their rights as heirs are being infringed upon. I understand that the biggest issue stems from attorney John B. Elliott and some 200 probates he handled. From what I know, the heirs never received notice of probate let alone notice of the transactions that he was engaging in, which is why more rules were needed regarding notice. However, what I think what we are trying to communicate is that if the heirs are aware and consent in writing to the appointment of a particular person who is not on the approved list, e.g. ex-spouse, stepchild, family friend, etc., this should not be prohibited. If the AG's position that should not be allowed even if they consent in writing, you might as well know that now, so not to waste any additional time in seeking their blessing, and we can just take the proposed changes up with
our local legislators.
I should point out to the AG, we (the attorneys) are trying to keep things inexpensive for future clients. We could just keep our mouths closed as we stand to make a whole lot more money on intestate estates under this law.
-Marcus
Hawley Troxell
Yakima, WA.
From: wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> On Behalf Of Robert West
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2026 12:22 PM
To: wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com
Subject: Re: [WSBAPT] WSBAPT Digest, Vol 143, Issue 7
* NOTICE: EXTERNAL EMAIL *
________________________________
I fully concur with the comments and analysis of Chris Neil. Probates are about 30% of my practice. I don't have actual cost numbers available at this time but in my opinion the minimum costs for a "simple" NIP probate will at least triple for clients. I currently have such a probate in which the heirs are three brothers. There is noting complicated about it and involves a single parcel of real estate. However, I truly believe the legal administration costs will significantly exceed the average costs in recent years. I also believe the new requirements imposed on third party and unrelated PRs are understandable and reasonable.
Regards, Bob
ROBERT E.WEST, JR.
WEST LAW OFFICES, P.S.
332 1st Street NE
Auburn WA 98002
Telephone: 253-351-9000
Facsimile: 253-833-5322
E-Mail: rwest at westlawoffices.com<mailto:rwest at westlawoffices.com>
Website: www.WestLawOffices.com<http://www.WestLawOffices.com><http://www.WestLawOffices.com<http://www.WestLawOffices.com>>
----Original Message-----
From: wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> <wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>> On Behalf Of wsbapt-request at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbapt-request at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2026 12:00 PM
To: wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: WSBAPT Digest, Vol 143, Issue 7
Send WSBAPT mailing list submissions to
wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com>
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbapt<http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbapt>
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
wsbapt-request at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbapt-request at lists.wsbarppt.com>
You can reach the person managing the list at
wsbapt-owner at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbapt-owner at lists.wsbarppt.com>
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of WSBAPT digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. NEED DATA - NIP vs Full Intervention (Brent Williams-Ruth)
2. Re: NEED DATA - NIP vs Full Intervention (Christopher Neil)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 14:18:14 -0700
From: Brent Williams-Ruth <brent at williams-ruthlaw.com<mailto:brent at williams-ruthlaw.com>>
To: "WSBA Probate & Trust Listserv" <WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com>>
Subject: [WSBAPT] NEED DATA - NIP vs Full Intervention
Message-ID:
<CAMMb1JNsKApUEOS7gG06YgOyMwv27A=kpb9G7RzhwCNkn7erqA at mail.gmail.com<mailto:CAMMb1JNsKApUEOS7gG06YgOyMwv27A=kpb9G7RzhwCNkn7erqA at mail.gmail.com>>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Listmates -
I have led a very sheltered life in my practice. It has grown slowly over the last 11 years and though I have had over 500 probates, every single one has thus far been with NIP.
My talk with the AGO today was....challenging. I need data. They are going to be very hard to convince to made adjustments because they see nothing but scoundrel attorneys who are scamming innocent intestate estates.
Right now - what I need is example of what an NIP probate costs for you/your firm vs. Full Intervention.
One of the members on the zoom didn't even truly understand what the difference was between the two.
Appreciate any data points. I will not put any names to these figures unless expressly told that I can.
*Brent Williams-Ruth* (pronouns: he/him)
*Attorney-At-Law*
*Law Offices of Brent Williams-Ruth, **a division of BWR Consulting, PLLC*
*Physical Address: 500 S 336th Street, Suite 214; Federal Way, WA 98003*
*Mailing Address: **PO BOX 3319; Federal Way, WA 98063 *
Office/Scheduling Phone: (253) 285-7751
For All Meetings & Scheduling: info at williams-ruthlaw.com<mailto:info at williams-ruthlaw.com>
e-mail <Brent at Williams-RuthLaw.com<mailto:Brent at Williams-RuthLaw.com>> / website <http://www.williams-ruthlaw.com/<http://www.williams-ruthlaw.com/>> / facebook <http://www.facebook.com/bwrlaw<http://www.facebook.com/bwrlaw>> /
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20260807/e617e03c/attachment-0001.html<http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20260807/e617e03c/attachment-0001.html>>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 16:24:49 -0700
From: Christopher Neil <chris.neil at neillaw.com<mailto:chris.neil at neillaw.com>>
To: WSBA Probate & Trust Listserv <wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com>>
Subject: Re: [WSBAPT] NEED DATA - NIP vs Full Intervention
Message-ID: <834708F3-E6D0-4427-A3F2-32AA84AC3ACB at neillaw.com<mailto:834708F3-E6D0-4427-A3F2-32AA84AC3ACB at neillaw.com>>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Brent and Listmates,
Yes, I think WAPG can help provide data.
A nonintervention probate and a full-intervention probate are not economically comparable.
Without nonintervention powers, many routine decisions become a process: notice, pleadings, declarations, publications, waiting period, proposed orders, hearings, objections, mandatory return hearings, continuances, and then implementation of whatever the court authorizes.
Real estate is the clearest example.
A PR with nonintervention powers can generally list property, evaluate offers, exercise fiduciary judgment, and close. A PR without nonintervention powers is back in Chapter 11.56: petition, appraisal, required publication(s), waiting period, upset bids, statutory sale procedures, filed return of sale, confirmation pleadings, notice, a hearing, and the 90% of appraised value rule for private sales.
That is not a name change; it is a different case.
Guardianship attorneys who handled guardianship real-estate sales before UGA know exactly what this costs. Former RCW 11.92.090 required guardians to use the RCW 11.56 court-supervised process for real-property sales. The Legislature dropped that in the UGA, but it is still there in the full-intervention probate world.
The same is true on annual reporting and probate closing. RCW 11.68.090 exempts a PR with nonintervention powers from the reporting procedures in RCW 11.76.010 through .080. A full-intervention probate brings those procedures back into the case, making to comparable to a conservatorship.
I understand the policy concern when a stranger seeks appointment in an intestate estate with no prior relationship to the decedent or the family. Totally agree that caution is warranted there. But the same risk does not exist from a licensed or certified professional fiduciary.
EHB 2445 will be turning the intestate probate into something that looks like a Washington conservatorship circa 2019: extra process and attorneys? fees, not because anyone is doing anything wrong, but because the process itself requires much more lawyer and fiduciary time.
To be clear, sometimes court supervision is exactly what a case needs. I have a case right now in which full intervention makes sense because over time we realized the parties need a neutral decision-maker and the fiduciary needs the protection of court orders.
Protection has a price (cost to the heirs).
So if the AGO is evaluating this on the assumption that removing nonintervention powers merely changes the label on the probate, that assumption needs correction.
It fundamentally changes the manner, timing, and cost of administration.
Chris Neil | Attorney | Neil & Neil, P.S.
5302 Pacific Avenue, Tacoma, WA 98408 | Chris.Neil at NeilLaw.com<mailto:Chris.Neil at NeilLaw.com>
(253)475-8600 | f:(253)473-5746
So that you know: This email address is not continuously monitored. So, if your matter is urgent, please phone my office.
Also, this message is not encrypted. Therefore, it may not be secure. This message and attachments are confidential and may contain privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by email or 253-475-8600 and delete this message from your information system. Further use, disclosure, or copying of information in this email is not authorized, and receipt by anyone other than the named recipient is not a waiver of any attorney-client, work product, or other applicable privilege; or other confidentiality protections. Thank you.
> On Aug 7, 2026, at 2:18?PM, Brent Williams-Ruth <brent at williams-ruthlaw.com<mailto:brent at williams-ruthlaw.com>> wrote:
>
> Listmates -
>
> I have led a very sheltered life in my practice. It has grown slowly over the last 11 years and though I have had over 500 probates, every single one has thus far been with NIP.
>
> My talk with the AGO today was....challenging. I need data. They are going to be very hard to convince to made adjustments because they see nothing but scoundrel attorneys who are scamming innocent intestate estates.
>
> Right now - what I need is example of what an NIP probate costs for you/your firm vs. Full Intervention.
>
> One of the members on the zoom didn't even truly understand what the difference was between the two.
>
> Appreciate any data points. I will not put any names to these figures unless expressly told that I can.
>
> Brent Williams-Ruth (pronouns: he/him) Attorney-At-Law
>
> Law Offices of Brent Williams-Ruth, a division of BWR Consulting, PLLC
>
> Physical Address: 500 S 336th Street, Suite 214; Federal Way, WA 98003
>
> Mailing Address: PO BOX 3319; Federal Way, WA 98063
>
> Office/Scheduling Phone: (253) 285-7751
>
> For All Meetings & Scheduling: info at williams-ruthlaw.com<mailto:info at williams-ruthlaw.com>
> <mailto:info at williams-ruthlaw.com>
>
> e-mail <mailto:Brent at Williams-RuthLaw.com> / website
> <http://www.williams-ruthlaw.com/<http://www.williams-ruthlaw.com/>> / facebook
> <http://www.facebook.com/bwrlaw<http://www.facebook.com/bwrlaw>> /
>
> ***Disclaimer: Please note that RPPT listserv participation is not
> restricted to practicing attorneys and may include non-practicing
> attorneys, law students, professionals working in related fields, and
> others.*** _______________________________________________
> WSBAPT mailing list
> WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbapt<http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbapt>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20260807/208f6015/attachment-0001.html<http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20260807/208f6015/attachment-0001.html>>
------------------------------
***Disclaimer: Please note that RPPT listserv participation is not restricted to practicing attorneys and may include non-practicing attorneys, law students, professionals working in related fields, and others.*** _______________________________________________
WSBAPT mailing list
WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com>
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbapt<http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbapt>
End of WSBAPT Digest, Vol 143, Issue 7
**************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20260810/8367c4f2/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2026 15:28:43 -0700
From: Diane Kiepe <diane at kiepelaw.com>
To: "WSBA Probate & Trust Listserv" <wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: Re: [WSBAPT] Referral for Trust Litigation
Message-ID:
<CAOdPf2Hf0TRkXBWxiz+y=NG2ge0wS=zoeGwRFzrVwgs_MJcQPA at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
David,
You probably will find someone closer in location but in case you don't, I
do enjoy this type of work.
Diane Kiepe
Kiepe Estate and Probate, PLLC
diane at kiepelaw.com
200 N. Mullan Rd., Suite 203
Spokane Valley, WA 99206
509-808-2087
Confidentiality Notice: This page and any accompanying documents contain
information that is confidential, privileged, or exempt from disclosure
under applicable law and is intended for the exclusive use of the
addressee. This information is private and protected by law. If you are not
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this information in any
manner is strictly prohibited.
On Mon, Aug 10, 2026 at 2:55?PM David Faber <david at faberfeinson.com> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I am in need of a referral to handle some trust litigation. My client
> adopted a child who is a beneficiary of a trust. The trust's "professional"
> trustee has held the entire trust corpus (hundreds of thousands) in cash,
> failing to invest or seek any returns on the assets in what appears to me
> to be a clear breach of their fiduciary obligations under the prudent
> investor rule (by my calculations over the last seven years, the trustee
> could have more than doubled the value of the original trust estate simply
> by investing in an S&P tracking fund, for instance). The beneficiary (and
> potential client) is a young adult who is seeking (a) to remove and replace
> the trustee and (b) possibly sue for damages due to the current trustee's
> breach of fiduciary obligations. The client lives in Port Townsend.
>
> Self-referrals are great!
>
> Thank you!
>
> Best,
> David J. Faber
> Faber Feinson PLLC
> 800 Polk Street, Suite B
> Port Townsend, WA 98368
> (360) 379-4110
>
> *** NOTICE: ATTORNEY CLIENT COMMUNICATION - PRIVILEGED & CONFIDENTIAL.
> This communication may contain privileged or other confidential
> information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that
> you have received this communication in error, please do not print,
> copy, retransmit, disseminate, or otherwise use the information. Also,
> please indicate to the sender that you have received this communication in
> error, and destroy the copy you received.***
> ***Disclaimer: Please note that RPPT listserv participation is not
> restricted to practicing attorneys and may include non-practicing
> attorneys, law students, professionals working in related fields, and
> others.***
> _______________________________________________
> WSBAPT mailing list
> WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com
> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbapt
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20260810/75d57824/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
***Disclaimer: Please note that RPPT listserv participation is not restricted to practicing attorneys and may include non-practicing attorneys, law students, professionals working in related fields, and others.***
_______________________________________________
WSBAPT mailing list
WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbapt
End of WSBAPT Digest, Vol 143, Issue 10
***************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20260811/43108e6b/attachment.html>
More information about the WSBAPT
mailing list