3096 After the Probate Court ordered that no change could be made in a trust without prior authorization by the court, it was foreseeable that it would reject a petition for approval of a change in the trust that had been made without the court's authorization, so the court's denial of the petition did not supersede the negligence of the attorney who made the change as a proximate cause of resulting harm, regardless of whether the denial was reasonable.CitationLOMBARDO v HUYSENTRUYT (Probate Error) 91 CA4 656 [See: Rosh v Cave 26 CA4 1225, T/AT 8/94; Nola M v USC 16 CA4 421, T/AT 8/93; Hardison v Bushnell 18 CA4 22, T/AT 11/93]
|
|