Conservatorship of Cooper

Good Law
16 Cal. App. 4th 414·20 Cal. Rptr. 2d 84
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 8, 1993F018012California1,816 words

Opinion

Opinion

Franson, J.

Statement of Case and Facts

This appeal is a consolidation of a number of appeals from the orders of Judge Donald Cantwell settling accounts in conservatorship proceedings. Pursuant to these orders, the public guardian was surcharged in whole or in part for the bond fee which was charged by the public guardian and deposited in the county treasury in the individual estates under Probate Code section 2942, subdivision (c). In disallowing the fees, the judge first held the statute violated the equal protection clause by “selecting a particular class of persons for a species of taxation and no rational basis supports such classification.” The court cited Department of Mental Hygiene v. Kirchner (1960) 60 Cal.2d 716, 722 [ 36 Cal.Rptr. 488 , 388 P.2d 720 , 20 A.L.R.3d 353 ], as authority for its rulings. The court later changed its position; it disallowed the bond fees because the public guardian had “not met his fiduciary duty of showing his use of estate assets for his benefit should be approved by the court. The estate is being asked to bear a claimed, general cost of government, without any benefit or value shown to the conservatee’s estate.”

Discussion

Is Probate Code…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.