Tyler

Tyler v. Davis CA4/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 21, 2016D069463California3,370 words

Opinion

Opinion

INTRODUCTION

In this probate matter, Mary Tyler and her son Mark Tyler1 appeal the dismissal

of their petition challenging the validity of trust amendments and the actions of the

named trustee, Billy E. Davis. They also appeal the probate court's award of attorney

fees to the Zoological Society of San Diego (Zoo), a trust beneficiary, and Davis, the

named trustee. The Zoo and Davis contend the appeal from the dismissal of the Tylers'

petition is untimely because the Tylers did not file their notice of appeal within 60 days

of when they were served with a notice of entry of the dismissal order. We agree and

dismiss the appeal as to the dismissal order. We affirm the order awarding attorney fees

to the Zoo and Davis because we conclude the probate court had equitable power to enter

the awards and properly exercised its discretion to award fees in this case because the

Tylers commenced their action in bad faith.

BACKGROUND

A

Martha A. Bobbitt (Martha) and James R. Bobbitt (James) created the Bobbitt

Trust in 1985. James died on January 21, 2003. After his death, according to the terms

of the trust, the estate was divided into three subtrusts (Trust A, B, and…

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.