Legal Opinion

In Re Estate of Kendall

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided April 6, 2007No. Nos. 21676 and 21695PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Fain, Judge.

{¶ 1} Attorneys Carol Holm and Ronald Denicola appeal from orders of the Montgomery County Common Pleas Court, Probate Division, that denied, in part, their respective requests for attorney fees for work performed on an estate matter. Both attorneys contend that the trial court abused its discretion by failing to award them the full amount of fees requested.

{¶ 2} We conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion with regard to the fee awarded to Holm. However, the trial court did abuse its discretion to the extent that it denied Holm the right to collect on any charges…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Seasons Coal Co. v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  2. C. E. Morris Co. v. Foley Construction Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1978
  3. In Re Estate of LoveOhio Court of Appeals · 1965
  4. In Re Estate of FugateOhio Court of Appeals · 1993

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. In Matter of Estate of Brate, Ca2007-08-103 (7-14-2008)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2008
  2. In re Estate of WeinerOhio Court of Appeals · 2019
  3. In re Estate of StockmasterOhio Court of Appeals · 2012

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API