Legal Opinion

In Re the Guardianship & Conservatorship of Doyle

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided February 2, 2010No. A09-452PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

MINGE, Judge.

Appellant guardians and conservators of ward Harold F. Doyle challenge the district court’s order disallowing their accounts and certain fees and expenses paid to them out of the ward’s estate. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.

FACTS

In July 2004, the district court in its capacity as the probate court 1 appointed appellants Paul Peterson and H. Frances Peterson as guardians and conservators of Harold Doyle, a senior citizen who resides in a group home. Doyle was not indigent. Acting as conservators, appellants charged various expenses to and paid their claimed…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Fletcher v. St. Paul Pioneer PressSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1999
  2. United States v. Charles Eldon Gould, United States of America v. Joseph Patrick CareyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1976
  3. Nadherny v. Roseland Property Co.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2004
  4. In Re the Civil Commitment of GiemSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2007
  5. Payne v. LeeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1946

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Laymon v. Minnesota Premier Properties, LLCCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2017
  2. In re: Guardianship and Conservatorship of Adeline E. Chapman.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2015
  3. In the Matter of the Conservatorship of: Patricia Annette Wallace, Protected Person.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2016
  4. State v. HenleyWisconsin Supreme Court · 2011
  5. State v. NorgaardCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2017

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

Powered by the Exa API