Is it Ethical to Continue Representing Blatant Trustee Wrong-doer?

P

PR660

Member
Jurisdiction
California
My legal team is completely dumbfounded as to why Trustee continues to shell out Estate funds to attorneys to cover-up the fact that she originated an expensive swing-loan on Trust assets to purchase her home.

Her house of cards will be collapsing and, perhaps she doesn't know she'll be on-the-hook for it all...?

She is currently on her 3rd legal firm representing her in this matter.

What would typically be the reason for switching?

Is it ethical for the her attorneys to continue in this?

Your insight and thoughts are greatly appreciated.
 
Who are you in this matter?
Why do you care? (This might be answered by the above question.)
If you have a "legal team", then you really ought to be consulting with them. If THEY don't know, then they know how to find out.
 
Some trusts are under other peoples names with the perpetrator basically squatting on the property. Unless your LEGAL TEAM looks deeply into it and pulls the court contract they may never know that it exists or that the property is an asset. Trusts are sometimes used to hide assets from creditors and sometimes they succeed for a very long long time.
 
Zigner said:
Who are you in this matter?
Why do you care? (This might be answered by the above question.)
If you have a "legal team", then you really ought to be consulting with them. If THEY don't know, then they know how to find out.
Click to expand...

1) Beneficiary and plaintiff.

2) I've spent tens-of-thousands of $$$ "out-of-pocket " (approx $82,000) since retention of counsel in 2019.

As of December 2016, Trust was 100% liquid/all cash--
After several years of certified letters and emails with no replies, I threatened legal recourse and finally received the Accounting in mid 2019. There were several objections and I was ignored once again. Therefore, I was forced to retain counsel in 2019-- still ongoing...

3) I'm having lunch with main attorney next week and I'm simply curious about the general consensus about this issue prior to the meeting...
 
Last edited:
Our thoughts on the matter are irrelevant. Speak to your attorney.
 
Trustee is apathetic. May not even now what it's all about. In our first (unsuccessful) in court mediation hearing, I was asked, "Who is so and so?"

The person in question was a mutual friend who, back in 2016, assisted in making phone calls and getting paperwork submitted to settle/distribute some accounts that had named beneficiaries. What the heck does this have to do with the Accounting objections and the case at hand? In any case, this person passed shortly thereafter.

Also, Trustee states in recent Interrogs that she had no intention of purchasing home when the loan of about $200,000 originated, but records show that proceeds from the loan were wired directly into the purchased property's escrow account. IMHO, a bright 4th grader would be able to determine from this, that there was some kind of intent...And there's so much more messed up stuff besides this...
 
PR660 said:
She is currently on her 3rd legal firm representing her in this matter.
Click to expand...

That tells me she is likely either (1) a very difficult person to deal with, (2) doesn't pay legal bills in a timely fashion, or (3) wants the attorneys to do things that would promote a crime or violate the ethics rules.

PR660 said:
What would typically be the reason for switching?
Click to expand...

There are all kinds of reasons why a client drops a lawyer or that a lawyer drops a client. But when a client hops to (so far) three different lawyers, that's usually a sign that the problem is the client, not the lawyers.

PR660 said:
Is it ethical for the her attorneys to continue in this?
Click to expand...

Doing what, exactly? Do you know exactly what advice was given by the lawyer? Did the trustee simply ignore the advice her attorneys gave her? What actions of the attorneys do you think is unethical?

An attorney has the obligation under the rules of professional conduct to zealously represent his/her client to acheive the client's objectives so long as the lawyer can do so without violating the law (or encouraging the client to violate the law) or violating the rules of professional conduct. But the client has no obligation to heed the advice given her by her lawyers. It is not unusual for pig headed people to just do what they want regardless of any advice given them (whether legal advice or any other advice). A lawyer can only do so much to reign in his/her client. Ultimately if the client doesn't want to heed the advice given and makes decisions that may violate the law (or just goes well beyong the attorney's comfort zone for basic human ethics) the attorney will have to come to a decision to drop that client.

In short, much of what you may be seeing in this situation may be driven by the trustee, not the lawyers. As I noted above, that's a problem that can result in lawyers dumping the client. If she had changed only once and the actions of the trustee improved then I'd suspect the prior lawyer was the problem. But when she goes through 3 attorneys and the same things keep happening, I strongly supect that the trustee herself is the problem.

It may be time for you to go to court to seek removal of the trustee if the trustee is the problem. You lawyers should tell you how likely it is that you would succeed given all the facts of the trustee's conduct and what that is likely to cost. The trustee has an important job, and if it's not being done correctly you want to get someone else in there who is up to the task.
 

Share this page

Get a free case review from a lawyer
Back
Top