Borissoff

Borissoff v. Taylor & Faust

Bad Law
15 Cal. Rptr. 3d 735·2004 Cal. LEXIS 6284·2004 Daily Journal DAR 8584·33 Cal. 4th 523·93 P.3d 337
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJuly 15, 2004S105600California3,953 words

Opinion

Opinion

Werdegar, J.

This case raises the question whether the successor fiduciary of an estate in probate may assert a professional negligence claim against attorneys retained by a predecessor fiduciary to provide tax assistance for the benefit of the estate. We hold the successor fiduciary may do so.

I. BACKGROUND

Testator Veronica M. Smith died on June 16, 1989, leaving two wills, one executed in 1983 and the other in 1987. The 1987 will named plaintiff Robert A. Borissoff as executor. Decedent’s grandniece filed an action in probate court to contest the 1987 will. Pending resolution of the contest, the court appointed Paul Springer, an attorney and former probate commissioner, as special administrator. Springer retained defendants, the law firm of Taylor & Faust (hereafter Faust, or the Faust defendants), to provide assistance on tax matters. In their retention letter to Springer, the Faust defendants recited that they had “agreed to prepare the Federal and California estate tax returns and the fiduciary income tax returns for the estate, to provide [Springer] with tax planning advice concerning the estate and to perform any other legal services which [Springer] requests].” Springer…

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.