Opinion ID: 2357613
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Trial Court Properly Denied Ms. Karim's Petition To Stay The Sale Of The Adrian Street Property.

Text: Ms. Karim appeals the trial court's denial of her petition to stay the sale of the Adrian Street property and its grant of Ms. Gurley's petition to sell the property. She alleges that good cause existed for restraining Ms. Gurley's actions as the personal representative because Ms. Gurley should have sought to sell the vacant Lee Street property, in which Ms. Bates had a partial interest, instead of the income-generating Adrian Street property. Additionally, Ms. Karim objected on the grounds that she wanted to keep the property in the family and that her two children had been living at the Adrian Street property following the decedent's death. Ms. Gurley contended that she sought to dispose of the Adrian Street property first because she wished to forego the animosity involved in co-ownership of the property among her siblings. The trial court's decision that good cause exists to restrain a supervised personal representative from acting is committed to the discretion of the trial court and is reviewable by this court only for an abuse in its exercise. D.C.Code § 20-521; see also In re Estate of Delaney, 819 A.2d 968, 1002 (D.C.2003) (holding that trial court's discretionary power to appoint a personal representative was reviewable under abuse of discretion standard due to permissive statutory language). We discern no abuse of discretion in the trial judge's conclusion that Ms. Gurley acted appropriately in her capacity as personal representative of the estate. In denying Ms. Karim's motion to stay the sale of the Adrian Street property, the trial court credited Ms. Gurley's explanation that [i]t's not feasible not feasible [sic] in her judgment to partition the property among [the siblings] except through a sale [and t]here is no other feasible way of disposing of the estate except through sale of the property. The estate had a total value of approximately $245,000, and each of the three siblings was entitled to equal one-third shares worth approximately $81,600. Notwithstanding Ms. Karim's desire to keep the property in the family, the estate lacked sufficient cash to pay those interests unless the Adrian Street property was sold. The income the Adrian Street property generated  $650 per month  clearly was insufficient to pay the financial interests of the three siblings in a timely manner. The trial court also credited Ms. Gurley's testimony that it would be imprudent and impractical for the three siblings to hold the Adrian Street property as tenants-in-common. Moreover, the trial court noted that the increased bond that Ms. Gurley filed, which would cover the interests of Ms. Karim and Ms. Tilghman in the property, would satisfy any concern regarding possible defalcation or mistake by the personal representative['s] abuse of fiduciary duty. The trial court correctly noted that all of Ms. Gurley's actions were authorized by the general statutory grant of powers to a personal representative [15] and that it was not convinced that it would unreasonably jeopardize [the interests of the heirs who had equal shares in the property]. Moreover, the trial court noted that Ms. Gurley was under a duty to sell the estate expeditiously and fairly and that Ms. Gurley's petition to sell the property was something that should be done in the ordinary course of the administration of the estate, would be done by any other personal representative, and could well be done. See D.C.Code 20-701(a) (A personal representative . . . is a fiduciary who . . . is under a general duty to settle and distribute the estate of the decedent . . . as expeditiously and efficiently as is prudent and consistent with the best interests of the persons interested in the estate.). Therefore, the trial court noted that it did not see any interest that's contrary to that of the petitioner. For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the trial court's orders denying Ms. Karim's petition to remove Ms. Gurley as personal representative and Ms. Karim's petition to stay the sale of the Adrian Street property. [16] Affirmed.