- 10 -
Respondent’s contention appears to rest on his supposition that
the legal work and litigation costs were generated by one estate
and then doubled without performing the same work for the second
estate. The estates, however, point out that the work was
performed in connection with the preparation for and trial of
both estate tax cases, which were consolidated for purposes of
trial, briefing, and opinion. The estate contends further, that
certain of the issues in both estates were the same, so that the
legal work could be performed once and one-half the cost charged
to each estate. The estates have shown, by means of affidavits
and explanations, that there was no double billing for the same
legal work.
There is nothing in the materials before the Court that
would support respondent’s contention. Nor is it apparent that
the amount of the attorney fees and costs are disproportionate to
the quantity of work described in the billing statements.
Conversely, the uncontradicted affidavits provided in support of
the estates’ position on this aspect of the controversy are
unequivocal on this point.
Accordingly, we hold that the amounts claimed for attorney’s
fees and costs are not duplicate billings.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011