Court Opinion

ID: 9787091
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 00:10:32.96992+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:36:52.104560
License: Public Domain

TAYLOR, J.,
dissenting
11 I must dissent. I believe the provisions of 60 O.S. Supp.2000 175.57(D) were enacted to give courts discretion in trust proceedings such as this. Here, the record reflects careful scrutiny by the trial judge in awarding attorney's fees and costs. The record also shows the court considered the factual elements required by Burk v. City of Oklahoma City, 1979 OK 115, 598 P.2d 659. There was no abuse of discretion by the trial judge. To the contrary, the court below should be commended for the professionalism demonstrated in presiding over this complex and difficult case.
12 Although it is likely the former trustee's attorney made the strategic decisions concerning the defense of this litigation, the majority opinion will leave the former trustee exposed to the potential of personal liability for substantial attorney's fees incurred while successfully defending his actions as trustee. I believe that, under these circumstances, such exposure is not just or equitable.
13 I would affirm the trial court in all respects.