From the Wool-sack

• Jurisdiction: Colorado,United States
• Citation: Vol. 8 No. 9 Pg. 1705
• Pages: 1705
• Publication year: 1979

8 Colo.Law. 1705 Colorado Lawyer 1979.

1979, September, Pg. 1705. From The Wool-Sack

---

1705

Vol. 8, No. 9, Pg. 1705

From The Wool-Sack

by Christopher R. Brauchli

This is what extremely grieves us, that a man who never fought should contrive our fees to pilfer, one who for his native land never to this day had oar, or lance, or blister in his hand.

---Wasps, Aristophanes

It is easy in a column, such as this, to spend all one's time trying to be witty by poking fun at legal problems without ever giving one's reader a chance to learn what the resolution of some of those problems has been. It is with special pleasure, therefore, that this month's column is written, since not only can I advise my reader of a particular problem but I can also tell my readers its solution. Since the problem deals with fees, it will only concern those readers interested in making money.

Those who practice in the area of probate law are thoroughly familiar with the case of Painter v. First National Bank of Greeley, 567 P.2d 820 (1977). That case is well known among probate lawyers because it was the first case to be decided after the passage of the Colorado Probate Code which dealt with the question of reasonable attorney's fees.(fn1) It is not necessary for me to enumerate the factors which the code says, and the court affirmed, are important. I should note, however, that the court said that what matters now is not how big the estate is but what services are required and rendered, an innovative concept to say the least.

In discussing the Painter estate, the court held that there were no novel or difficult questions and that since the bank had been conservator for many years prior to Painter's death, its task as administrator consisted principally of selling the one stock owned by decedent and purchasing instead its own certificates of deposit, preparing and filing tax returns and distributing assets. It further found that the expert witnesses who testified for the bank and for the attorneys had used the percentage method in arriving at their fees, which was expressly rejected by the General Assembly when it adopted the Colorado Probate Code. The court held that the bank's fees of $39,337 for serving as administrator and the attorney's fees in the amount of $42,000 were excessive. It remanded for a re-determination of both fees.

That case had a depressing effect on lawyers. The reason is not hard to find. Up...