Legal Opinion

In re the Guardianship of Lamb

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided December 21, 2009No. Nos. 62711-2-I; 62613-2-IPublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLeach, J.

¶1 The decision to award guardian fees lies within the discretion of the superior court. But the court may award fees only for work performed by the guardian that directly benefits the ward. In this appeal, we are asked to decide whether James and Alice Hardman, the coguardians of Sandra Lamb and Rebecca Robins, may be compensated for engaging in the specific advocacy activities listed in their advocacy report. Because the Hardmans fail to establish that these activities provide a direct benefit to their wards, we hold that they are not entitled to compensation under the facts of this case.

FAC…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. State Energy Resources Conservation & Development CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. State Ex Rel. Carroll v. JunkerWashington Supreme Court · 1971
  3. In Re the Welfare of ColyerWashington Supreme Court · 1983
  4. Blanchard v. Golden Age Brewing Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1936
  5. Silverstreak, Inc. v. STATE DEPT. OF LABORWashington Supreme Court · 2007

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. In re the Guardianship of LambWashington Supreme Court · 2011
  2. Donald Hoth v. Edward HothCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2020
  3. In The Matter Of: The Catherine P. Davis Living TrustCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2021
  4. In re Guardianship of LambCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2009
  5. Robert Hays, V. Hays Elliott Properties, LlcCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2023

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

Powered by the Exa API