Summary 2010 WY 91

Summary of Decision issued June 29, 2010

Summaries are prepared by Law Librarians and are not official statements of the Wyoming Supreme Court.

Case Name: Garwood v. Garwood

Citation: 2010 WY 91

Docket Number: S-09-0092

Appeal from the District Court of Platte County, the Honorable John C. Brooks, Judge.

Representing Orlan O. Garwood and Carol A. Jones as Trustees: Scott W. Meier and Lucas E. Buckley, Hathaway & Kunz, PC, Cheyenne, Wyoming.

Representing William J. Garwood: No appearance.

Facts/Discussion: William Garwood filed a lawsuit seeking an order directing the Trustees (Orlan O. Garwood and Carol A. Jones), who are two of Mr. Garwood’s children and two of the three designated Trustees of the W.J. Garwood and Mildred E. Garwood Trust (Family Trust) to pay him a sum of money from the Family Trust sufficient to provide for his support as provided by the terms of the trust. The district court issued an order allocating trust assets and directing payments to Mr. Garwood. The Trustees appealed. The Court affirmed. (No personal representative filed notice or filed a brief for Mr. Garwood who died in 2009.)

Jurisdiction: The Trustees argued that once they filed their notice of appeal in Garwood I, the district court was without jurisdiction to rule on Mr. Garwood’s motion for removal of Trustees and recovery of attorneys’ fees expenditures by the Trustees. The question of attorneys’ fees and costs in a given civil action is a common issue that a trial court may address and it does not require the filing of a separate action or a motion to amend a judgment. The issue was properly placed before the district court by Mr. Garwood’s timely filing of a post-judgment application for fees and costs. Consistent with Rule 6.01, the Court has held that during the pendency of an appeal, the district court has the right and power to enforce its decrees and orders and to protect the parties as to any rights they acquired in the district court proceedings. The district court acted prudently in delaying its consideration of the issue until the Court had ruled on the Garwood I appeal.
Abuse of discretion: The Trustees contended that even if the district court had jurisdiction to enter its order on the Trustees’ fees and costs, the court abused its discretion in allowing the Trustees only $10,000 in fees and costs. Generally, Wyoming subscribes to the American rule regarding recovery of attorneys’ fees, making each party responsible for its own attorneys’ fees unless an award of fees is permitted by contract or statute. Wyoming has adopted the Uniform Trust Code (UTC) which authorizes an award of fees and costs in judicial proceedings involving the administration of a trust. The Court may award costs and expenses including reasonable attorneys’ fees to any party to be paid by another party or from the trust that is the subject of the controversy. The Trustees contended that a trustee involved in a legal proceeding over a trust may simply pay the costs of litigation as an ordinary expense of administering the trust. Based upon the UTC, it is for the trial court to determine whether fees and costs were properly incurred in a trustee’s official capacity and if so, what constitutes a reasonable amount for those fees and costs. The litigation at issue was a judicial proceeding involving the administration of a trust and it was for the district court to determine the amount of fees and costs. The district court found and the Court affirmed that not only did the trust not benefit Mr. and Mrs. Garwood, the litigation made necessary by the Trustees’ refusal to sell the Wheatland property likewise did little to benefit the Family Trust. The Court could not find that the district court abused its discretion in limiting the amount of fees to the percentage it did. The Trustees contended the district court should have reviewed the billing statements of the Trustees’ attorneys to ascertain what fees benefited the Trust. The Trustees had opportunity to submit an application for an award of fees and costs supported by the billing statements and did not do so. Under the circumstances in the instant case, the Court would not remand to review the billing statements. The Trustees contended they were exposed to an award of damages in their personal capacities without notice and in violation of their due process rights. The order directing the Trustees to reimburse the Family Trust was not a damages award. Referring to the district court’s findings, the Trustees acted primarily in their personal interests in the litigation. The Trustees had ample notice and opportunity to defend their decision to unilaterally withdraw funds from the Family Trust for their litigation expenses.

Conclusion: The district court had jurisdiction to address issues relating to an award of attorneys’ fees and costs. The district court did so in a proper manner, and the Court found no abuse of discretion in the court’s decision.

Affirmed.

J. Golden delivered the decision.

Link: http://tinyurl.com/2u6449l .

[SPECIAL NOTE: This opinion uses the "Universal Citation." It was given an "official" citation when it was issued. You should use this citation whenever you cite the opinion, with a P.3d parallel citation. Please note when you look at the opinion that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you pinpoint cite to a quote, you should cite to this paragraph number rather than to any page number. If you need assistance using the Universal Citation format, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library.]