In re the Guardianship of Bayer

Citations

• 80 Wash. 340

Syllabus

<p>Insane Persons—Guardianship—Accounting—Expenses — Additional Attorneys—Necessity. A guardian is not warranted in employing special counsel to defend proceedings for his removal, or to establish the ward’s sanity, or to meet objections to his final account, where the issues were not complicated and the general counsel of the guardian was fully able to handle the matters, no necessity for additional counsel being shown.</p> <p>Same—Expenditures'—Appeal—Findings. Findings as to necessary traveling expenses of a guardian will not be disturbed on appeal where the lower court was in a better position than the appellate court to try the fact, and the findings do not appear to be contrary to the preponderance of the evidence.</p> <p>Insane Persons—Guardianship — Termination — Discharge or Guardian—Debts. Where an insane ward is found to be competent, she is entitled to the immediate full control of both her person and estate, under Rem. & Bal. Code, § 1671, and it is proper to discharge the guardian, malting proper provision for the payment of unpaid debts or matters involving the striking of a balance between the guardian and ward, without making provision for the payment of debts and expenses of the guardian from the property then in his hands.</p> <p>Guardian and Ward—Accounting—Expenses and Allowances— Appeal-—-Review. On appeal by a ward, from allowances to the guardian on final settlement, for personal expenses and expenditures involving the welfare of the ward, the supreme court will defer to the judgment of the lower court, where it was familiar with the local situation, had a great deal to do with the proceedings, and could know what was proper in determining the justness of the claims.</p>