legal news


Register | Forgot Password

Reedy v. Bussell
Todd Bussell appeals from orders allowing attorney fees to be paid out of three trusts, following extensive litigation involving those trusts. Although Todd[1] disagrees with the fee orders, his appeal does not challenge their merits. Instead, Todd argues the court erred in deciding both the amount and the allocation of fees among the trusts, without holding an evidentiary hearing and without first allowing him to take discovery. We are unpersuaded. The court did hold a hearing on the fee petitions, and those petitions were supported by evidence. The court gave Todd the opportunity to file opposition, and Todd was free to include whatever evidence he believed relevant in his opposition. That is all that is necessary to constitute an evidentiary hearing.
Additionally, the court did not deny Todd the opportunity to take discovery. Our record reflects that Todd never initiated any, and instead waited until a month and a half after the fee petitions were filed to seek an ex parte order allowing him to initiate discovery on shortened time. The court was not required to grant that relief. The orders are affirmed.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale