This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Probate and Trusts
Breach of Contract

Amelia Eng v. Margaret Eng, Susan Eng Madjar, Michael Eng, Jeffrey Eng, Taylor Unger, Jonathan Lum Jr., Zhong Pei Wu, Norman H. Green

Published: Dec. 13, 2014 | Result Date: Nov. 12, 2013 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: BP113977 Bench Decision –  Respondents

Court

L.A. Superior Central


Attorneys

Petitioner

Richard C. Davidoff


Respondent

Kathryn E. Van Houten

Kerry M. Kinney


Facts

In 2006, petitioner Amelia Eng had assisted her father in settling Frances Eng, her late mother's affairs, after a disagreement over property valuations occurred between her father and her brother, Michael Eng, who was co-executor of their mother's estate. In an attempt to resolve the dispute, petitioner's father entered into a contract to make a Will that would leave certain assets to Michael in settlement of his disputes over his mother's estate.

Petitioner filed an action, claiming that the 2006 contract to make a Will was in breach of an earlier agreement not to change his 2003 Will.

Contentions

PETITIONER'S CONTENTIONS:
Petitioner made a Creditor's Claim and filed a petition in the Estate of Edward Eng relating to her claim that the Contract to Make a Will was in breach of a purported 2004 agreement petitioner had made with her father.

RESPONDENTS' CONTENTIONS:
Respondents contended that before their father died, and shortly after their mother died, there was a meeting held at the family residence wherein various matters were discussed. On that date, certain of petitioner's siblings expressed concern over the fact that their father had on numerous occasions threatened to cut various of his children out of his own Will. He reassured them by telling them that he was not revoking his 2003 Will under which his daughters shared equally after certain assets were devised to the son. Thereafter, the father died, leaving a new Will, which substantially reduced petitioner's share.

Respondents claimed that in a 2004 memorandum, the father stated his then present intention was not to revoke his Will, because he loved his children. Respondents claimed that this was not adequate consideration and was not enforceable.

Settlement Discussions

Petitioner demanded $2 million. Respondent offered $160,000.

Damages

Petitioner sought $4,280,000 in damages.

Result

The court denied the petition and found the petition had been filed unreasonably. Respondents were awarded attorney fees, under Probate Code section 9354(c), in the amount of $439,614, and the administrator, Norman H. Green, was awarded $100,804.

Other Information

Petitioner has appealed both the judgment and the award of attorney fees. FILING DATE: Dec. 4, 2008.


#86311

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390