SAN JOSE -- In his strongest language yet, a Santa Clara County judge threw out almost $30,000 in attorney's fees charged to the trust of a disabled San Jose man whose fight against excessive charges in the local probate court is spawning sweeping reforms. While Judge Franklin Bondonno said he lacks the power to strike down another $145,000 in attorney's fees billed to the trust of Danny Reed, the judge -- in a highly unusual gesture -- implored a higher court to overturn his decision.
The ruling comes in the aftermath of this newspaper's investigation, "Loss of Trust," which highlighted Reed's costly fight to beat back high trustee and attorney's fees billed to the 37-year-old brain-damaged man's special needs trust. When Reed objected, his trustee's attorney charged even more to defend the original bills.
"At some point, this endless wasting of Danny Reed's trust assets must stop," Judge Franklin Bondonno stated in a ruling released Monday. "As far as this Court is concerned, that moment is long past."
Bondonno's latest action strikes down a third set of fees requested by attorney Michael Desmarais, who is representing prominent Silicon Valley trustee Thomas Thorpe in this closely watched case illustrating the high cost of estate managers who serve elderly and disabled adults -- and how the court did little for years to stop it. In less than a month, the newspaper's series has prompted more scrutiny in Santa Clara County's lead probate judge's courtroom and a 25-member task force to study more far-reaching changes.
Original charges
In 2010, Thorpe hired Desmarais to defend a six-figure bill for just 41/2 months' work as a court-appointed trustee to manage Reed's estate, which -- under state law -- is on the hook for "reasonable" legal bills racked up on all sides of the case. When Reed objected to Thorpe's and his attorneys' original $108,000 bill, the costs soared.
The bills submitted by Thorpe's team so far amount to more than half of the money Reed has left in his trust. Reed's legal team includes a public defender and two private attorneys working free of charge.
Full Article and Source:
San Jose: Judge rejects nearly $30,000 attorney fee to disabled man's trust
See Also:
Santa Clara judge reconsiders his early ruling on a trustee excessive fee case
The Mercury News' "Loss of Trust" Series (Anchor article)
THE LAW MUST CHANGE: Billing beasts should defend their own bloated bills out of pocket, like families are forced to do when trying to free their loved ones from captivity by the state under a good law, gone bad.
ReplyDeleteThis is an amazing article. Has a judge ever done this before?
ReplyDeleteThank you Judge Franklin Bondonno and thank you NASGA for posting. It gives me hope again.
Well if I didn't read this with my own eyes I would be doubtful. Hmmmmm $30K is a chunk of change but if I were the judge deciding this I would hit them even harder to send a message loud and clear the party on other's money in your pocket is over boys.
ReplyDeleteSanta Clara County needed a bright spotlight to shine upon it and expose the darkness of guardianship. Thank you Mercury News and NASGA.
ReplyDeleteGuess it's only 99% bad guys?
ReplyDeleteWe never see good stuff in the media!
I am a member of NASGA and am up against the Santa Clara Public Guardian. I hope the Mercury News does a series of the financial exploitation of conservatorship wards at the hands of the Public Guardian as well. It's not just the for-profit guardians as in the Danny Reed case. The Public Guardian needs to be scrutinized.
ReplyDeleteThank you Mercury News for a fine job of reporting. I hope you're not finished.
NASGA is behind you, Danny Reed!
ReplyDeleteGood news for Danny Reed and I hope all judges take heed of what Judge Bondonno has done in this case. Do we have any NASGA members in Judge Bondonno's court?
ReplyDeletei would like to get in touch with danny reed as i have a similar case. he can email me at dennismcbride@yahoo.com
ReplyDelete