ÿWPCͬ "•6­(`æÌ[í R쟛 ~"Þ¦?‰•{l%w>?$ÇlOü>°,îIF0aòñèö4È-Èxí œ /¯ßÊþ¹LSQ­ZÚ¨³Ÿ&Ôîéµ.t+kȦц4±| à[Üä2B¼Û˜yÍêÜ;§-f Dï>ôIÙRµ]'ÕnÇ,€”>RîíedT°·Î¯Pì§2zOK ÍT=vYãn’ÂnQ"ºšûS%Ò_. †*Á,qëíþô¯–IùM“5 ÿØ„ˆž%““GT²„ÒÐ]àegÁ“˜©¡!Ð+ïm*ñ^ZæQÊ2ßGD„º ŽÏÙC$ùU¾SãqÏwÅ´“¨^CÃ>_hÞs5G¼Až73T˜–‡÷~Ã{ RšNЗàÉð½ÿûÆžœîdËÕ/rF1˜Y±ÅÎ;Ù¯X,ë ãhï÷|™Ð¢Yï OO"Ô¼¡NÀAmNb5 OÁ¼G¦$–áh–±Ænb³®X“7<ÿ¶OÂe¼áÜ·ës‚€ß~£:êª-ÏYÜv\ÌwžŸS|‘Þ²¥oQÜ7˜é=òµñê£æ»´9˜j–}lûQ‚5yã­Æ]Ù,e;àÏÎ 75 Zæg\@ÙU…N– %ä 0ˆê #Ár Œ3 Ú¿ ^ ™ z¥Òñ m w Æ$ÆêưÆv4<NPR &ZE€‚U@‘óÑ ^Ä 0&D" f 0ôo 1‡c ê 0ñõ 0îæ 0ëÔ 0è¿ § 0å¯ 0â”  v 0߀ 0Ü_! 0â;" 0ß# 0Üü# 0ÙØ$b±% 0Ö¹% 0Ó& 0Ðb' 0Í2( 0Êÿ( 0áÉ) 0Þª* 0Ûˆ+ 0Øc, 0Õ;- 0Ò. 0Ïâ. 0̱/ 0É}0 00F1 0<v1 0¾²1 0>p2 0v®2 0`$3 0`„3 0`ä3 0`D4 0`¤4 085 0Ò<5 026 0ü@6 0:<7 0Yv7 0_Ï7 0 .8 0j89 0„¢: B*&< 0& P< D/Z= 0„‰= D/ ? BlFU*ªFäÔF AM¸GÛHU+NàJe.Kî“N8Q 0c¹X 1uY 72‘YÃY•â_jwajácxKejÃgÃgÃg-l– ClüÙuÛÕxÚ°|åŠ~ÝoyL‡øňňI½Žç0íí¬””aÉ–*™f2›†˜œ˜œžžA3¡3¡5t¢}©¥ô&¨&¨&¨û«««¸¬(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular»(`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó˜HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 6ÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\CUSTOM~1\OPINION3.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\Custom WP Templates\opinion3.wpt:§Š+s  ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt Ñ e Ñ!ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 58n_+s´¥¡ \Opinion Summary3|xô\  `(Times NewRomanTT éÝ ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡lôæ òòôæ Ô€€Ô#†ôæ òòlôæ ž#ÔThose€fees€are€not€in€dispute.€€Also€not€in€dispute,€and€we€think€not€fairly€attributable€to€Mr.€Pursellððs€feesÐ ° Ðfor€purposes€of€this€discussion,€is€the€payment€to€Mr.€Pursellððs€firm€for€their€successful€work€in€the€wrongful€death€action.?\Appellees Attorney Name & Appellee's Name.(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó ÿÝ ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú20Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔWe€note€the€beneficiaries€raised€the€issue€in€their€response€to€the€petition€for€additional€fees.2J+M ÿÿ0_level1Ó ¨ý ÓÓ X ÓÓ2( ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 2ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó(5hCEKQW]cioAutoList11.1.1.1.1.1.1.1. Ý ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú24Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡lôæ òòôæ ÔAppellants€assert€that€any€fees€paid€to€them€for€their€activities€as€directors€of€FWC€or€professional€advisorsÐ ° Ðto€FWC€or€the€estate€ð ðare€irrelevant€to€the€determination€of€the€Executorsðð€fee€owed€pursuant€to€the€NationsBank€feeÐ tÄ Ðschedule.ðð€€Ô#†ôæ òòlôæ ž#Ô2G+M ÿÿ0_level2Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ° ÓÓ/%` ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ /ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2D+M ÿÿ0_level3Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ,"¸ ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ ,ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2A+M ÿÿ0_level4Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ` ÓÓ) hÀpÈ xÐ )ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2>+M ÿÿ0_level5Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ¸ ÓÓ&hhÀpÈ xÐ &ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó92;+M ÿÿ0_level6Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ#ÀÀpÈ xÐ #ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó28+M ÿÿ0_level7Ó ¨ý ÓÓ h ÓÓ pÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó1225+M ÿÿ0_level8Ó ¨ý ÓÓ À ÓÓppÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó22+M ÿÿ0_level9Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓÈÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2JM ÿÿ0_levsl1Ó ¨ý ÓÓ X ÓÓ2( ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 2ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2GM ÿÿ0_levsl2Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ° ÓÓ/%` ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ /ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2DM ÿÿ0_levsl3Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ,"¸ ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ ,ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2AM ÿÿ0_levsl4Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ` ÓÓ) hÀpÈ xÐ )ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó- ù-2>M ÿÿ0_levsl5Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ¸ ÓÓ&hhÀpÈ xÐ &ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2;M ÿÿ0_levsl6Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ#ÀÀpÈ xÐ #ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó28M ÿÿ0_levsl7Ó ¨ý ÓÓ h ÓÓ pÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó25M ÿÿ0_levsl8Ó ¨ý ÓÓ À ÓÓppÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó22M ÿÿ0_levsl9Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓÈÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2JM ÿÿ0_levnl1Ó ¨ý ÓÓ X ÓÓ2( ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 2ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2GM ÿÿ0_levnl2Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ° ÓÓ/%` ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ /ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2DM ÿÿ0_levnl3Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ,"¸ ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ ,ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2AM ÿÿ0_levnl4Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ` ÓÓ) hÀpÈ xÐ )ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2>M ÿÿ0_levnl5Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ¸ ÓÓ&hhÀpÈ xÐ &ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2;M ÿÿ0_levnl6Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ#ÀÀpÈ xÐ #ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó28M ÿÿ0_levnl7Ó ¨ý ÓÓ h ÓÓ pÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó25M ÿÿ0_levnl8Ó ¨ý ÓÓ À ÓÓppÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó22M ÿÿ0_levnl9Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓÈÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó0ÿÿ.Normal<ÿÿ:Definition T<AAÿÿ:Definition LÓ , ÓÓ5+Ü Ü` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5Ó8ÿÿ6Definitionòòóó(''ÿÿ&H1ò òÔ  ÔÔ‡°°°ÔÔ‡XXXÔó óÔ  Ô(ÿÿ&H2ò òÔ‡„„„ÔÔ‡XXXÔó ó(ÿÿ&H3ò òÔ‡¼¼¼ÔÔ‡XXXÔó ó(ÿÿ&H4ò òÔ‡XXXÔó óÔ‡XXXÔ(ÿÿ&H5ò òÔ‡ôôôÔÔ‡XXXÔó ó(ÿÿ&H6ò òÔ‡ÔÔ‡XXXÔó ó2ÿÿ0Addressòòóó8MMÿÿ6BlockquoteÓ , ÓÓ , ÓÓ5+Ü Ü` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ  ÓÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5Ó,ÿÿ*CITEòòóó,dlÿÿ*CODEÔ‡ôôôÔÔK‡f<þ6X9`(‹Courier NewKÔÔ‡XXXÔÔS‡gô\  `‹&Times New RomanSÔ4ÿÿ2Emphasisòòóó6ÿÿ4HyperlinkóóòòÔ ÿ ÔóóÔ  Ô<ÿÿ:FollowedHypeóóòòÔ €€ ÔóóÔ  Ô4goÿÿ2Keyboardò òÔ‡ôôôÔÔK‡f<þ6X9`(‹Courier NewKÔÔ‡XXXÔÔS‡gô\  `‹&Times New RomanSÔó ó<“›ÿÿ:PreformattedÓ/%° °Ïî ,KkŠ©È %#/ÓÔ‡ôôôÔÔK‡f<þ6X9`(‹Courier NewKÔÔ‡XXXÔÔS‡gô\  `‹&Times New RomanSÔÓ/%° °Ïî ,KkŠ©È %#/Ó<š®ÿÿ:z©Bottom of Ó7€S(€X7ÓÓ  ÓÔ‡ÔÔ?‡h%ä2¼A`‹Arial?ÔÓ  ÓÔ‡XXXÔÔS‡gô\  `‹&Times New RomanSÔÓ7€Z(€X7Ó&ÿÿ  d d(›G2á $¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€R»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔQ)1dxd<š®ÿÿ:z©Top of ForÓ7€U(€X7ÓÓ  ÓÔ‡ÔÔ?‡h%ä2¼A`‹Arial?ÔÓ  ÓÔ‡XXXÔÔS‡gô\  `‹&Times New RomanSÔÓ7€Z(€X7ÓQ)2dxd d0KSÿÿ.SampleÔK‡f<þ6X9`(‹Courier NewKÔÔS‡gô\  `‹&Times New RomanSÔ(|3‡c$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€R»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó0ÿÿ.Strongò òó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3‡c$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€R»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKK8dlÿÿ6TypewriterÔ‡ôôôÔÔK‡f<þ6X9`(‹Courier NewKÔÔ‡XXXÔÔS‡gô\  `‹&Times New RomanSÔ4ÿÿ2Variableòòóó: ÿÿ8HTML MarkupÔB  ÔÔ ÿ ÔÔ  Ô2 ÿÿ0CommentÔB  Ô<þ6X9`(‹Courier Newô\  `‹&Times New Roman%ä2¼A`‹Arial ÚÝ ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú34Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔA€correction€of€the€calculation€would€appear€to€be€in€order.X[ZA<< cÿÿ ÑÝ ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ôæ òòôæ Ô€The€executors€made€arrangements€for€Mr.€Pursellððs€law€firm€to€handle€the€matters€arising€from€the€collisionÐ ° Ðthat€took€the€testatorððs€life.€€Ultimately,€the€firm€filed€a€wrongful€death€action€which€resulted€Ô#†ôæ òòôæ #ÔÔ‡ôæ òòôæ Ôin€a€settlement,€approvedÐ tÄ Ðby€the€court,€for€over€$1.5€million,€with€the€law€firm€receiving€$495,037€in€fees.€€Ô#†ôæ òòôæ È#ÔThe€net€proceeds€were€paid€directlyÐ 8ˆ Ðto€the€heirs.(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman Regular [Ý ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€The€primary€holding€in€òòPerlbergóó€was€that€a€will€which€provides€that€no€compensation€will€be€paid€theÐ ° Ðexecutor€prevails€over€the€statute,€and,€in€that€situation,€€the€executor€will€not€receive€even€reasonable€compensation€forÐ tÄ Ðnecessary€services.€€òòIdóó.€at€306„307.€€ð ðWe,€therefore,€hold€the€Appellantððs€contentions€that€estate€representatives€areÐ 8ˆ Ðentitled€to€be€paid€as€a€matter€of€law,€even€where€the€will€provides€to€the€contrary,€is€without€merit.ððòò€Id.óó€€òòPerlbergóó€didÐ üL Ðnot€involve€a€situation€where€the€executor€asserted€entitlement€to€payment€under€the€will€regardless€of€reasonableness.€ äÝ ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ôæ òòôæ ÔFederal€and€state€estate€taxes€became€due€some€nine€months€after€the€testatorððs€death.€€The€estate€owedÐ ° Ðapproximately€$2.7€million€in€estate€taxes.€€To€make€the€initial€payment,€which€was€due€in€September€of€1995,€the€estateÐ tÄ Ðhad€to€borrow€$950,000.€€According€to€Appellants,€the€taxes€deeply€concerned€them€because€they€faced€personal€liabilityÐ 8ˆ Ðas€co„executors€if€they€were€not€paid.€€Thus,€the€indemnity€provision€was€an€important€part€of€any€agreement.Ô#†ôæ òòôæ #Ô .Ý ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú18Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€cases€Appellants€cite,€which€emphasize€the€€importance€of€the€testatorððs€intent€regarding€the€amount€ofÐ ° Ðcompensation€executors€receive,€do€not€involve€situations€where€the€benefit€of€a€specified€fee€arrangement€goes€to€theÐ tÄ Ðattorney€who€drafted€the€will€and€is€also€acting€as€an€executor€and€director€of€a€corporation€which€is€the€major€asset€ofÐ 8ˆ Ðthe€estate.€€òòSee,€e.g.,€In€re€Estate€of€Loutsionóó,€496€A.2d€1205€(Pa.€Super.€1985).€The€authorities€the€beneficiaries€citeÐ üL Ðfor€the€proposition€that€the€probate€court€may€examine€executorððs€fees€for€reasonableness€do€not€involve€situations€whereÐ À Ðthe€will€states€the€method€for€calculating€the€fees.€€òòSee€e.g.,€Estate€of€Cuneoóó,€475€S.W.2d€672€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1971)€(noÐ „Ô Ðprovision€in€will€setting€executorððs€compensation);€òòIn€Re€Estate€of€Griffithóó,€452€S.W.2d€895€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1969)Ð H ˜ Ð(same);€òòYoung€v.€Phillipsóó,€93€S.W.2d€634€(Tenn.€1936)€(same);€òòIn€re€Hickððs€Estateóó,€510€S.W.2d€263€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ð  \ Ð1972)€(there€was€no€will).€€òòUnderwood€v.€United€Statesóó,€407€F.2d€608,€610€(E.D.€Tenn.€1969),€is€distinguishable€becauseÐ Ð  Ðin€that€case€the€executors€were€permitted€to€renounce€the€compensation€provisions€of€the€will€and€accept€the€statutoryÐ ” ä  Ðfee.€€This€was€because€the€will€ð ðwas€not€susceptible€of€reasonable€interpretation.ðð€€òòUnderwoodóó,€407€F.2d€at€610.€€TheÐ X ¨  Ðexecutors€conditioned€their€appointment€on€abrogation€of€the€testatorððs€compensation€limitation.(;3£$´´Ô2#ÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  à3#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)qi) Ý ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú21Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€Ô‡lôæ òòôæ ÔIn€òòPetty€v.€PrivetteóóÔ#†ôæ òòlôæ Ÿ#ÔÔ‡lôæ òòôæ Ô,€No.€03A01„9102„CH„00084,€1991€WL€200252,€at€*3€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Oct.€9,€1991)€(noÐ ° ÐTenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed),€this€court€later€Ô#†ôæ òòlôæ û#ÔÔ‡lôæ òòôæ Ôheld€Ð tÄ ÐÌà8  àBecause€of€the€confidential€relationship€between€the€drafting€attorney€and€the€testator,€there€is€aÐ üL Ðrebuttable€presumption€that€the€clause€beneficial€to€the€attorney€was€the€result€of€the€attorneyððs€undueÐ À Ðinfluence€on€the€testator,€and€the€burden€of€rebutting€this€presumption€rests€with€the€attorney.€€In€theÐ „Ô Ðinstant€case,€the€trial€court€held€that€this€burden€of€proof€must€be€met€by€clear€and€convincing€evidenceÐ H ˜ Ð.€.€.€.€€Although€the€clear€and€convincing€standard€has€been€relaxed€in€some€circumstances,òòóó€we€areÐ  \ Ðconvinced€that€the€clear€and€convincing€standard€of€proof€is€the€better€rule€in€situations€where€anÐ Ð  Ðattorney€in€his€capacity€as€executor€may€benefit€from€an€exculpatory€clause€which€he€or€a€member€ofÐ ” ä  Ðhis€firm€has€drafted.ÐX ¨ Ð Ð  ÐÌòòIdóó.€at€*4€(citations€omitted).€Ð à 0  ÐÔ#†ôæ òòlôæ Ý#Ô ‹Ý ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ôæ òòôæ ÔThe€same€day,€the€beneficiaries€filed€a€motion€for€appointment€of€business€advisors,€seeking€the€replacementÐ ° Ðof€Appellants€with€two€other€individuals.€€Ô#†ôæ òòôæ #Ô `Ý ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú22Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔBy€their€position€as€co„trustees,€they€are€also€a€majority€of€the€board€of€directors€of€the€corporation€which€isÐ ° Ðthe€principal€asset€of€the€trust.€€In€that€role,€they€were€able€to€make€hiring€and€compensation€decisions€for€professionalÐ tÄ Ðservices€for€the€corporation.€€As€a€majority€of€the€co„executors,€they€were€able€to€make€similar€decisions€regardingÐ 8ˆ Ðprofessional€services€for€the€estate. `Ý ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú32Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThere€is€a€reference€to€157€hours€in€the€record,€but,€again,€the€discrepancy€does€not€affect€our€reasoning.€Ð ° ÐAdditionally,€we€note€that€154.6€hours€x€$125/hr.€Equals€$19,325. nÝ ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú19Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€record€shows€that€Mr.€Whisenant,€the€testatorððs€accountant,€also€advised€the€testator€regarding€theÐ ° Ðexecutorððs€fees.€€Although€Mr.€Whisenant€did€not€actually€draft€the€will,€the€record€shows€that€he€had€agreed€to€be€anÐ tÄ Ðexecutor€and€was€enmeshed€in€advising€the€testator€about€the€appropriate€method€of€determining€the€executorððs€fees,Ð 8ˆ Ðincluding€fee€schedules€used€by€institutional€trustees.€ `Ý ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú28Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€trial€court€also€stated,€ð ðNumber€one,€that€settlement€works€because€a€lot€of€times€most€of€the€work€is€doneÐ ° Ðin€the€first€90€days€and€the€last€90€days,€and€youððre€kind€of€coasting€in€the€middle,€whether€thatððs€one€year€or€two€yearsÐ tÄ Ðor€three€years.€€That,€combined€with€the€fact€that€Mr.€Pursell€and€Mr.€Whisenant€did€resign€.€.€.€in€fairness€to€Mr.€Pursell,Ð 8ˆ Ðso€that€I€wonððt€sound€like€a€total€hypocrite,€I€did€insist€that€if€he€did€not€voluntarily€resign€that€I€would€take€certainÐ üL Ðactions,€so€I€donððt€want€to€sound€like€a€hypocrite,€but€I€respect€the€fact€that€he€voluntarily€did€resign.€€And€I€think€heÐ À Ðmade€the€right€decision€for€a€lot€of€reasons.€€And€I€never€asked€Mr.€Whisenant€to€resign,€but€Mr.€Whisenant,€for€veryÐ „Ô Ðvalid€reasons,€as€stated€on€the€witnesses€stand,€I€respect€his€individual€choice€in€that€regard.ðð€€ Ñ ° Ñ Œ Ý ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú37Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔIf€Appellants€are€concerned€that€the€trial€courtððs€statement€implied€professionally€improper€conduct,€we€noteÐ ° Ðthat€the€trial€court,€in€fact,€went€out€of€its€way€to€dispel€such€notions€in€another€context.€€Although€at€the€beginning€ofÐ tÄ Ðthe€status€conference€the€court€had€expressed€its€concern€about€the€possible€conflict€of€interest€and€concomitantÐ 8ˆ Ðappearance€of€impropriety€raised€by€Mr.€Pursellððs€almost€omnipresent€involvement€in€this€case,€at€the€close€of€thatÐ üL Ðconference,€òòóóthe€court€stated:Ð À ÐÌà8  àAnd€I€would€like€to€state€that€itððs€a€very€positive€reflection€on€the€strength€of€integrity€of€Mr.€PursellÐ H ˜ Ðto€voluntarily€resign€from€these€fiduciary€capacities,€and€important€to€say,€in€fairness€to€Mr.€Pursell,Ð  \ Ðit€would€sound€like€heððs€been€tried€and€fried€without€the€opportunity€to€be€heard,€and€thatððs€not€theÐ Ð  Ðcase€here.€€Some€issues€were€raised,€and€what€weððre€dealing€with€are€principles€of€a€concept€andÐ ” ä  Ðwhether€or€not€they€create€some€appearances€of€a€conflict€of€interest€and€what„have„you.€€And€itððs€veryÐ X ¨  Ðimportant€for€this€record€to€be€clear€and€everyone€in€this€room€to€fully€understand€that€I€have€madeÐ  l  Ðno€finding€on€any€conflict€of€interest.€€I€have€made€no€finding€of€any€professional€impropriety.€€I€haveÐ à 0  Ðthe€highest€regard€for€Mr.€Pursell.€€Heððs€an€excellent€attorney€and,€candidly,€a€very€dear€friend.€€AndÐ ¤ô  Ðitððs€with€great€respect€for€Mr.€Pursell€that€I€think€heððs€made€a€wise€decision€to€allow€this€estate€to€goÐ h¸  Ðforward.€€And€it€would€also€be€noted€that€Mr.€Pursell€had€either€a€14€or€17€year€relationship€with€Mr.Ð ,|  ÐWakefield,€and€Mr.€Wakefield€clearly€had€great€respect€and€trust€and€fondness€for€Mr.€Pursell,€andÐ ð@  Ðthat€should€not€be€lost€in€this€situation.€€But€I€think€Mr.€Pursell€is€wise€to€step€aside€when€theÐ ´  Ðappearance€of€a€conflict€exists€so€that€the€case€can€go€forward,€and€he€is€not€unfairly€the€subject€ofÐ xÈ  Ðbeing€second„guessed€in€everything€heððs€done. òÝ ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú16Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔIn€addition,Ô‡ôæ òòôæ Ô€a€guardian€ad€litem€for€one€of€the€minor€beneficiaries€pointed€out€another€issue€raised€by€theÐ ° Ðaffidavits,€stating:Ð tÄ ÐÌà8  àSo€if€there€had€not€been€a€conflict€of€interest,€the€attorney€would€have€gone€to€NationsBank€and€said,Ð üL Ðð ðWhat€would€you€have€settled€this€estate€for,ðð€and€he€would€have€gotten€a€written€statement.€€And€IÐ À Ðthink€it€would€be€less€than€that,€and€I€think€we€have€affidavits€here€today€that€show€this€is€true.Ô#†ôæ òòôæ ª#Ô ÑÝ ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔAccording€to€an€affidavit€from€a€vice€president€of€NationsBank,€that€institution€bases€its€fee€for€ððordinaryððÐ ° Ðservices€on€a€percentage€of€the€asset€value€of€the€estate€and€a€percentage€of€the€income€received€by€the€estate€duringÐ tÄ Ðadministration.€€In€addition,€the€bank€would€customarily€request€an€enhanced€fee€ððfor€services€rendered€beyond€theÐ 8ˆ Ðnormal€time€spent€by€an€executor€on€an€ordinary€estateðð,€or€ððextraordinary€services.ðð€€According€to€the€schedule,€€theÐ üL Ðadministration€charge€is€calculated€at€5%€on€the€first€$100,000€of€estate€assets,€3%€on€the€next€$300,000,€2%€on€the€nextÐ À Ð$600,000,€and€1%€on€all€over€$1,000,000.€€A€fee€of€6%€is€charged€on€the€gross€income€received€during€administration.€ ÐÝ ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú23Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔAn€audit€report€indicates€the€shares€of€stock€were€held€by€the€Estate€of€M.L.€Wakefield;€the€will€would€indicateÐ ° Ðthey€were€held€by€the€Wakefield€Family€Trust.€€In€either€event,€the€co„executors€and€co„trustees€had€the€same€dutyÐ tÄ Ðregarding€the€management€of€the€asset. ÛÝ ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔIn€their€response,€the€beneficiaries€also€questioned€the€contingency€fee€paid€to€Mr.€Purcellððs€firm€for€handlingÐ ° Ðthe€wrongful€death€claim€pursuant€to€an€agreement€between€the€firm€and€the€co„executors,€including€Appellants,€withÐ tÄ Ðno€negotiation€with€the€beneficiaries,€under€EC€2„20€of€the€Code€of€Professional€Responsibility.€€These€fees€wereÐ 8ˆ Ðapproved€by€another€court€in€settlement€of€the€wrongful€death€action.€€On€appeal,€the€beneficiaries€have€not€raised€anyÐ üL Ðissues€regarding€these€fees. ÓÝ ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú15Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔOtis€Goodin,€NationsBank€Vice€President€and€trust€officer,€confirmed€his€prior€affidavit€testimony€stating,Ð ° Ðð ðthe€fee€schedule€is€intended€by€NationsBank€as€the€fee€to€be€charged.€€However,€it€would€not€be€unusual€in€estates€ofÐ tÄ Ð$5,000,000€or€more€that€the€amount€based€on€the€fee€schedule€would€be€negotiated€and€fee€concessions€made€based€onÐ 8ˆ Ðcircumstances€where€appropriate.ðð€€Additionally,€there€is€an€affidavit€of€T.€Richard€Travis,€a€former€trust€officer€and€viceÐ üL Ðpresident€of€NationsBank€and€its€predecessors,€C&S€Sovran€Bank€and€Commerce€Union€Bank,€stating,€ð ðit€was€myÐ À Ðexperience€at€NationsBank€(and€its€predecessor€banks)€that€in€setting€fees€for€very€large€estates€($10,000,000€or€moreÐ „Ô Ðin€gross€assets),€it€was€not€unusual€for€the€executorsðð€fees€to€be€negotiated€with€the€beneficiaries€using€the€published€feeÐ H ˜ Ðschedules€as€a€guideline.€€In€those€cases€the€Bank€would€consider€making€concessions€and€reducing€fees€in€certain€areasÐ  \ Ðas€seemed€appropriate€under€the€circumstances.ðð€€Finally,€M.€Kirk€Scobey,€Jr.,€Executive€Vice€President€and€Senior€TrustÐ Ð  ÐOfficer€of€Equitable€Trust€Company,€submitted€an€affidavit€to€the€same€effect. oÝ ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú25Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡lôæ òòôæ ÔAppellants€assert€that€they€carefully€segregated€the€time€they€spent€in€each€role€and€kept€detailed€records€ofÐ ° Ðthat€time.€€Ô#†ôæ òòlôæ ž#Ô îÝ ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú35Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€trial€court€did€not€specifically€rule€on€these€issues.€€Later,€all€the€beneficiaries,€including€the€minorsÐ ° Ðthrough€their€guardians€ad€litem,€entered€into€an€agreement€to€waive€any€enforcement€or€application€of€the€òòin€terroremóóÐ tÄ Ðclause.€€Upon€learning€of€this€agreement,€Appellants€informed€the€beneficiaries€that€the€agreement€likely€requiredÐ 8ˆ Ðapproval€by€the€court€because€of€its€impact€on€the€distributive€share€of€the€minor€beneficiaries.€€Appellants€moved€forÐ üL Ðsummary€judgment€asking€the€court€to€declare€the€petition€for€construction€to€be€a€will€contest€in€contravention€of€theÐ À Ðwillððs€òòin€terroremóó€clause.€€These€issues,€as€well€as€the€proposed€sale€of€FWC,€the€pending€fee€request,€and€theÐ „Ô Ðbeneficiariesðð€request€that€Appellants€resign,€were€part€of€the€status€conference€held€June€27,€1997.€€Mr.€Pursell€resignedÐ H ˜ Ðat€the€conference,€and€Mr.€Whisenant€resigned€a€few€days€later.€€On€November€12,€1997,€the€successor€co„executors€andÐ  \ Ðthe€beneficiaries€entered€an€agreed€order€withdrawing€the€pleadings€which€had€invoked€the€òòin€terroremóó€clause€andÐ Ð  Ðretroactively€approving€the€prior€agreement€among€the€beneficiaries.€€The€trial€court€entered€the€order. ?Ý ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú29Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔMr.€Purcellððs€portion€of€the€fee€request€for€other€than€ð ðextraordinary€servicesðð€is€$105,204€($315,611€dividedÐ ° Ðby€3€is€$105,203.67). ÝÝ ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú17Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€will€made€no€provision€for€successor€executors€or€trustees. &Ý ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú30Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔAdditionally,€as€the€court€noted,€the€percentage€fee€applied€to€the€value€of€the€gross€estate€does€not€appearÐ ° Ðto€apply€equitably€to€partial€administration€of€an€estate€or€partial€handling€of€a€trust.€€That€fee€appears€to€be€a€one„timeÐ tÄ Ðcharge€on€principal€for€ð ðadministration€of€an€estateðð€and€is€based€upon€ð ðthe€market€value€of€all€probate€assets,€as€finallyÐ 8ˆ Ðdetermined€for€Federal€Estate€Tax€Purposes.ðð€€Thus,€it€is€questionable€whether€a€resigning€executor€or€trustee€could€claimÐ üL Ðentitlement€to€the€entire€amount€even€if€the€fee€schedule€were€applicable. ¢Ý ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€court€found€that€Mr.€Wakefield€had€not€received€an€explanation€of€ð ðwhat€extraordinary€services€are€orÐ ° Ðhow€they€would€be€computed€or€how€much€they€might€beðð€and€that€the€testator€did€not€understand€that€aspect€of€the€feeÐ tÄ Ðschedule,€€The€trial€court€later€stated,€ð ðBut€I€feel€strongly€that,€based€upon€the€evidence€Iððve€heard€for€eight€days,€thatÐ 8ˆ Ðno€one€was€able€to€explain€to€Lou€Wakefield€what€that€NationsBank€fee€schedule€really€meant.ðð WÝ ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔAlthough€there€is€some€indication€in€the€briefs€that€the€directors€were€paid€$3000€per€month,€the€testimonyÐ ° Ðshows€that€they€received€$125€per€hour€for€their€services.€€They€invoiced€FWC€for€amounts€over€the€$3000€monthly€total.€Ð tÄ ÐThe€amounts€set€out€above€were€taken€from€a€chart€prepared€by€the€beneficiaries.€€Appellants€were€questioned€about€theÐ 8ˆ Ðfigures€and€did€not€dispute€them. þÝ ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ôæ òòôæ ÔShortly€thereafter,€€Appellants€filed€a€petition€to€sell€real€property,€arguing€that€certain€property€should€be€soldÐ ° Ðto€pay€the€estateððs€taxes,€debts,€expenses,€personal€representatives,€and€creditors.€€Ô#†ôæ òòôæ #ÔThe€beneficiaries€contested€theÐ tÄ Ðpetition. \Ý ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú26Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€testator€owned€two€sole€proprietorships,€MLW€Company€and€MLW,€Ltd.,€which€owned€land€andÐ ° Ðbuildings€leased€to€FWC€and€owned€machinery€and€equipment€also€leased€to€FWC. |Ý ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú31Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔòòHowell€v.€DeLoachóó,€No.€01A01„9704„PB„00154,€1997€WL€629958,€at€*2€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Oct€14,€1997)€(noÐ ° ÐTenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed)€(defining€jurisdiction€of€Davidson€County€Probate€Court). Ý ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔActually,€the€beneficiaries€announced€they€would€accept€Appellantsðð€resignations€on€terms€and€conditionsÐ ° Ðpreviously€offered€by€Appellants€if€the€court€approved.€€In€addition,€another€unresolved€matter€of€contention€between€Ð tÄ Ðthe€parties€was€raised.€Appellants€asserted€that,€subject€to€the€courtððs€approval,€they€were€prepared€to€proceed€with€theÐ 8ˆ ÐESOP€plan€providing€for€the€employeesðð€ownership€of€FWC.€€The€adult€beneficiaries€successfully€sought€additional€timeÐ üL Ðto€decide€whether€they€wanted€to€make€a€counterproposal€to€that€plan. 7Ý ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú33Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€154.6€hours€of€work€performed€would€have€been€compensated€at€$582€per€hour€if€the€$90,000€in€retainerÐ ° Ðfees€were€allowed€to€stand. +Ý ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú36Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔA€large€portion€of€Appellantsðð€brief€is€spent€on€this€issue.€€The€record€reveals€that€the€issue€was€also€theÐ ° Ðsubject€of€a€large€part€of€Appellantsðð€summation€arguments€at€the€fee€hearing,€and€that€discourse€with€the€court€ensued.€Ð tÄ ÐWe€do€not€disagree€with€Appellants€that€the€trial€court€clearly€voiced€its€opinion€of€an€executor€using€the€threat€ofÐ 8ˆ Ðdisinheritance€to€shield€fee€requests.€€However,€Appellants€maintained€throughout€that€this€was€not€the€purpose€of€theirÐ üL Ðfilings,€and€the€trial€court€and€counsel€ð ðagreed€to€disagreeðð€over€the€law€on€this€issue.€€ sÝ ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔAppellants€have€maintained€on€appeal€that€various€issues€were€not€properly€before€the€trial€court.€€To€the€extentÐ ° Ðthose€assertions€are€based€on€claims€the€beneficiaries€failed€to€raise€those€issues,€the€response€summarized€earlier€andÐ tÄ Ðthe€statements€of€the€beneficiariesðð€counsel€at€the€beginning€of€the€hearing€demonstrate€that€the€beneficiaries€objectedÐ 8ˆ Ðto€additional€fees€on€the€various€bases€enumerated. êÝ ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔAlthough€Ms.€Sandlin,€the€other€co„executor€and€co„trustee,€did€not€ask€for€additional€fees,€she€ð ðexpect[ed]Ð ° Ðto€receive€one„third€of€whatever€co„executorsðð€fees€are€approved€by€the€court.ðð€€At€the€hearing,€Ms.€Sandlinððs€positionÐ tÄ Ðwas€clarified:€as€a€beneficiary,€she€objected€to€any€additional€fees,€and€she€did€not€think€the€co„executors€were€entitledÐ 8ˆ Ðto€any€additional€fees.€€As€a€co„executor,€her€position€was€that€if€the€co„executors€were€awarded€additional€fees,€she€wasÐ üL Ðentitled€to€one„third. ñÝ ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú27Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔWe€note€that€amount€would€be€divided€by€three,€allowing€each€of€Appellants€$29,500. ®Ý ƒRá $ÝÓ  ÓÔ€ôæ ò»»Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôæ òòôæ ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔSee€footnote€13.Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€R»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€¼R»»»ÔÑ  ÑÑ8€XXdì»»d8ÑÑ€ ïWÑÑ€{OaÑà@¦ ¦ ìàIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@ŠŠ$ìàAT€NASHVILLE€ˆÐ  Ðà@!ìàMay€6,€1999€SessionˆÐ Ô$ ÐÔ‡XX»¼RÔÌò òÔ#†¼R»XXÌ#ÔÓ  ÓIN€RE:€ESTATE€OF€M.L.€WAKEFIELD,€DECEASEDÔ‡XX»¼RÔó óÐ Ò" ÐÓÓÌà@B B ìàò òAppeal€from€the€Probate€Court€of€Davidson€CountyˆÐ Ò " Ðà@ ìàNo.€94P1917€€€€€Frank€G.€Clement,€Jr.,€Probate€JudgeˆÐ ¾  ÐÌÌà@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<` A߈Ð ‚Ò  ÐÌà@÷ ÷ ìàM1998„00921„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€Filed€December€10,€Ô_Ô2001Ô_ԈР}Í  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<T` AßÐ U¥  Ðó óÌÔ% ‡ ÔThis€case€involves€a€dispute€over€the€compensation€sought€byÔ‡XXXXÔ€two€of€three€co„executors€of€a€will€thatÐ P   Ðwas€drafted€by€one€of€them.€€The€will€provided€that€the€executors€should€be€ð ðpaid€fees€equal€to€thoseÐ <Œ Ðfees€customarily€charged€by€NationsBank€of€Nashville.ðð€€The€two€co„executors€each€received€€anÐ (x Ðinterim€payment€of€$50,000€in€compensation,€and€then€sought€additional€payments€under€the€feeÐ d Ðschedule.€€The€adult€beneficiaries€of€the€will€challenged€the€amount€of€compensation€sought€by€theÐ P Ðco„executors.€€Disagreements€and€tensions€continued€between€the€beneficiaries€and€the€two€non„Ð ì< Ðfamily€co„executors,€and,€after€strong€suggestion€by€the€probate€court,€tÔ#†XXXXí#Ôhe€two€non„family€co„Ð Ø( Ðexecutors€resigned.€€The€probate€court€heard€evidence€on€the€fee€request€and€refusedÔ‡XXXXÔ€to€awardÐ Ä Ðadditional€fees.€€The€court€also€ordered€the€attorney€co„executor,€co„trustee€to€disgorge€over€$70,000Ð ° Ðin€attorney€fees€paid€by€the€testamentary€trustððs€major€asset,€a€corporation€formerly€owned€solely€byÐ œì Ðtestator.€€The€co„executors,€co„trustees€were€the€directors€of€the€corporation,€and€the€disgorged€feesÐ ˆØ Ðhad€been€paid€pursuant€to€a€retainer€agreement€pre„existing€the€testatorððs€death.€€On€appeal,€the€twoÐ tÄ Ðco„executors€contest€these€rulings.€€In€a€cross„appeal,€the€beneficiaries€argue€that€the€probate€courtÐ `° Ðerred€in€denying€their€request€that€the€co„executors€disgorge€additional€fees.€€We€modify€the€trialÐ Lœ Ðcourtððs€award€of€reasonable€fees€but€otherwise€affirm.Ð 8ˆ ÐÔ#†XXXXƒ#ÔÔ%†¤ÔÔ#†¼R»XXG#ÔÔ‡XX»¼RÔÌò òÔ% ‡$ ÔÓ  ÓTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€€Appeal€as€of€RightÔ%†$k Ô;€Judgment€of€the€Probate€CourtÐ !`  ÐAffirmed€as€Modified€and€Remandedó óÐ ü!L! ÐÓx ÓÌòòPatricia€J.€CottrellÔ#†¼R»àXH #ÔÔ‡XX.¼RÔ,óó€J.,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€whichòòÔ% ‡' Ô€William€B.€CainòòóóÔ%†'Ê Ôóó,€J.,€joined.Ð Ô#$# ÐòòWilliam€C.€Koch,€JróóÔ#†¼R»XXs #ÔÔ‡XX»¼RÔ.,€filed€a€separate€opinion€concurring€in€part€and€dissenting€in€part.Ð À$ $ ÐÌHugh€C.€Howser,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellants,€Ronald€H.€Pursell€and€Robert€Whisenant.Ð ˜&è!& ÐÌÔ% ‡ ÔÔ%†QÔRichard€Holton€and€Charles€A.€Trost,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellees,€Judith€WakefieldÐ p(À#( ÐSandlin,€Nancy€Wakefield€Coleman,€Michael€C.€Wakefield,€Linda€Wakefield€Melvin,€Alden€H.Ð \)¬$) ÐSmith,€as€guardian€for€Nathan€Murry€Green,€and€Susan€R.€Limor,€as€guardian€for€Timothy€Louis€Ð H*˜%* ÐWakefield.Ð 4+„&+ ÐÌÐ  -\(-ý Їà@66'ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼R»XX_#ԈР° ÐÌÔ€XX»¼RÔà  àMurrey€Louis€Wakefield,€the€testator,€died€in€an€automobile€accident€on€December€18,€1994.Ð ®þ ÐHe€was€seventy„eight€(78)€years€old.€€Mr.€Wakefield€was€survived€by€four€adult€children,€JudithÐ šê ÐWakefield€Sandlin,€Nancy€Wakefield€Coleman,€Michael€C.€Wakefield,€and€Linda€Wakefield€Melvin.€Ð †Ö ÐOne€of€the€testatorððs€children,€Timothy€M.€Wakefield,€had€predeceased€the€testator,€leaving€twoÐ r  Ðminor€sons,€Nathan€Murray€Green€and€Timothy€Louis€Wakefield.€€These€children€and€grandchildrenÐ ^ ® Ðwere€the€beneficiaries€of€Mr.€Wakefieldððs€estate.€€At€the€time€of€the€testatorððs€death,€his€net€taxableÐ J š Ðestate€was€worth€over€$5€million€while€his€gross€estate€was€valued€at€$10.6€million,€according€to€theÐ 6 † Ðestate€tax€return.€€The€principal€asset€was€Feldkircher€Wire€Fabricating€Company,€Inc.€(ð ðFWCðð),€ofÐ " r  Ðwhich€the€testator€had€been€the€sole€shareholder.€€In€addition,€the€testator€owned€the€real€propertyÐ ^  Ðon€which€FWCððs€several€facilities€were€located,€and€houses€and€other€real€property,€including€a€farmÐ úJ  Ðon€which€he€conducted€a€cattle€breeding€operation.Ð æ6  ÐÌà  àThe€testatorððs€will€appointed€three€co„executors:€his€daughter,€Ms.€Sandlin;€his€longtimeÐ ¾  Ðpersonal€and€business€attorney,€Mr.€Pursell,€€and€his€longtime€personal€and€business€accountant,€Mr.Ð ªú  ÐWhisenant.€€Ô‡XXXXÔThe€will€also€named€those€three€individuals€Ô#†XXXXw#Ôas€co„trustees€of€all€trusts€established€underÐ –æ Ðthe€will.€€The€will€provided€for€compensation€in€return€for€discharging€the€duties€attendant€to€theseÐ ‚Ò Ðpositions,€stating:Ð n¾ ÐÌà8  àNo€one€acting€as€executrix,€executor,€or€trustee€shall€be€required€to€furnish€any€bondÐ F– Ðor€security€of€any€kind€for€the€faithful€performance€of€his€or€her€duties€as€executrix,Ð 2‚ Ðexecutor,€or€trustee.€€I€direct€that€my€co„executors€and€co„trustees€herein€shall€be€paidÐ n Ðfees€equal€to€those€fees€customarily€charged€by€NationsBank€in€Nashville,€Tennessee,Ð  Z Ðor€its€successors€for€estate€and€trust€administration€services.ÐöFÐ Ð  ÐÌà  à€The€will€was€drafted€by€Mr.€Ô_ÔPursellÔ_Ô,€and€the€testator€received€advice€from€both€Mr.€Ô_ÔPursellÔ_ÔÐ Î Ðand€Mr.€Whisenant€regarding€the€method€of€compensation€for€the€executors€and€trustees.€€The€willÐ º  Ðcontained€several€bequests€of€specific€property€to€named€individuals,€and€directed€that€the€remainderÐ ¦ö Ðof€the€estateððs€assets,€which€included€the€stock€in€Ô_ÔFWCÔ_Ô,€should€be€placed€in€the€M.L.€WakefieldÐ ’â ÐFamily€Trust.€€That€trust€was€to€be€terminated€prior€to€the€eleventh€anniversary€of€the€testatorððsÐ ~ Î Ðdeath.Ð j!º ÐÌÔ‡XXXXÔà  àÔ#†XXXX½#ÔThe€will€also€directed€the€co„trustees€to€continue€to€operate€FWC€as€its€board€of€directorsÐ B#’! Ðuntil€the€trust€was€terminated.€€The€company€had€not€previously€had€a€board€of€directors,€with€theÐ .$~" Ðtestator€having€exclusive€control€of€its€management€and€operation.€€The€will€Ô‡XXXXÔspecified€that€Ô#†XXXX?#ÔtheÐ %j # Ðdirectors€could€sell€FWC€if€they€deemed€it€financially€advisable.€€The€will€required€the€co„trusteesÐ &V!$ Ðto€continue€the€testatorððs€farming€and€cattle€breeding€activities€and€to€restore€a€specified€house€forÐ ò&B"% Ðone€of€testatorððs€children.Ð Þ'.#& ÐÌà  àÔ‡XXXXÔThe€will€also€included€an€òòin€terroremóó€clause€which€provided€for€the€revocation€of€the€benefitsÐ ¶)%( Ðof€any€beneficiary€who€contested€the€will.€Ô#†XXXXß #ÔÔ‡XXXXÔ€This€clause€stated:Ð ¢*ò%) ÐÐ Ž+Þ&* Ðà8  àIf€any€beneficiary€hereunder€shall€contest€the€probate€or€validity€of€this€will€or€anyÐ ° Ðprovision€herein,€or€shall€institute€or€join€in€(except€as€a€party€defendant)€anyÐ œì Ðproceeding€to€contest€the€validity€of€this€will€or€to€prevent€any€provision€herein€fromÐ ˆØ Ðbeing€implemented€in€accordance€with€its€terms€(regardless€of€whether€or€not€suchÐ tÄ Ðproceedings€are€instituted€in€good€faith€and€with€probable€cause),€then€all€benefitsÐ `° Ðprovided€for€such€beneficiary€are€hereby€revoked,€and€such€benefits€shall€pass€to€theÐ L œ Ðissue€of€said€beneficiary,€equally,€or€if€the€beneficiary€dies€without€issue€then€suchÐ 8 ˆ Ðbenefit€shall€pass€pursuant€to€the€terms€and€conditions€stated€herein.€€Each€benefitÐ $ t Ðconferred€herein€is€made€on€the€condition€precedent€that€the€beneficiary€shall€acceptÐ  ` Ðand€agree€to€all€the€provisions€of€this€will€and€the€provisions€of€this€paragraph€are€anÐ ü L  Ðessential€part€of€each€and€every€benefit.Ðè 8 Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àOn€December€28,€1994,€Mr.€Pursell€filed€a€petition€to€probate€the€testatorððs€last€will€andÐ À  Ðtestament.€€€That€day€the€probate€court€issued€an€order€admitting€the€testatorððs€will€into€probate.€€TheÐ ¬ü  Ðco„executors€then€took€steps€to€manage€the€estate,€including€retaining€counsel€to€pursue€claimsÐ ˜è  Ðagainst€the€driver€of€the€car€€which€collided€with€the€testator,׃k×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€finding€alternative€financing€for€FWCÐ „Ô  Ðto€retain€its€cash€flow,€and€taking€out€a€$950,000€loan€to€cover€a€portion€of€the€federal€estate€taxes.€Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àAlmost€from€the€first,€controversy€arose€between€the€beneficiaries,€including€Ms.€Sandlin,Ð H˜ Ðand€the€non„family€co„executors,€Mr.€Pursell€and€Mr.€Whisenant€(ð ðAppellantsðð).€€Early€on,Ð 4„ ÐAppellants€made€it€known€that€they€thought€it€was€in€the€estateððs€best€interest€to€sell€FWC.€€OneÐ  p Ðsuggestion€Appellants€made€was€to€effectuate€an€employee€stock€option€plan€(ð ðESOP€planðð),€whichÐ  \ Ðwould€have€given€the€employees€ownership€of€the€company,€and€they€spent€considerable€timeÐ øH Ðresearching€this€option.€The€adult€beneficiaries€objected€to€this€plan€because€they€preferred€to€retainÐ ä4 Ðthe€company€for€themselves.€Ð Ð  ÐÌÔ#†XXXXÅ!#Ôà  àMr.€Pursell,€or€his€law€firm,€initially€also€provided€legal€representation€to€the€estate.€€BecauseÐ ¨ø Ðof€developing€difficulties€between€Appellants€and€the€beneficiaries,€Appellants€retained€new€counselÐ ”ä Ðfor€the€estate€in€the€spring€of€1996,€ð ðfor€the€purpose€of€assisting€in€dealings€with€the€beneficiariesÐ €Ð Ðand€in€order€to€remove€any€apparent€conflict€of€interest€that€might€arise€from€continuingÐ l¼ Ðrepresentation€by€Mr.€Pursellððs€firm.ðð€€Mr.€Whisenantððs€accounting€firm€provided€accountingÐ X ¨ Ðservices€to€the€estate.Ð D!” ÐÔ‡XXXXÔÌà  àTheÔ#†XXXX/#Ô€number€of€disagreements€between€Appellants€and€the€beneficiaries€is€evidenced€by€theÐ #l! Ðvarious€filings€over€the€course€of€the€proceedings€below€and€is€acknowledged€and€recounted€in€theÐ $X" Ðbriefs€before€this€court.€€Most€of€the€substantive€disputes€regarding€management€of€the€estateððs€assetsÐ ô$D # Ðhave€been€resolved€and€are€not€on€appeal.€€Appellants€resigned€as€Co„Executors€and€Co„Trustees,Ð à%0!$ Ðas€reflected€in€an€agreed€order€entered€in€July€of€1997,€in€which€the€beneficiaries€agreed€to€indemnifyÐ Ì&"% ÐAppellants€from€ð ðany€and€all€duties,€responsibilities,€liabilities,€and/or€obligations€of€either€of€themÐ ° Ðarising€out€of€or€in€connection€with€the€duties€and€obligations€in€each€capacity.ðð׃n×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€First€AmericanÐ œì ÐNational€Bank€was€appointed€as€substitute€Co„Executor€along€with€Ms.€Sandlin.€€That€same€orderÐ ˆØ Ðreflects€that€Appellants€also€resigned€as€directors€of€FWC.€€Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àThe€issues€in€this€appeal€involve€compensation€to€Appellants.€€The€facts€relevant€to€thoseÐ L œ Ðissues€involve€a€detailed€procedural€history,€of€which€the€following€is€a€summary.€€Beginning€withÐ 8 ˆ Ðthe€interim€accounting€for€the€period€ending€November€20,€1995,€the€beneficiaries€have€questionedÐ $ t Ðdetails€of€accountings€and€questioned€or€opposed€various€actions€proposed€or€taken€by€Appellants.Ð  ` ÐFor€example,€in€an€exception€filed€to€this€first€accounting,€three€beneficiaries€asserted€that€theÐ ü L  Ðaccounting€was€inadequate,€challenged€the€propriety€of€a€$159,000€loan€the€estate€made€to€FWC,€and€Ð è 8  Ðexcepted€to€payment€of€over€$128,000€in€legal€and€professional€fees.׃Œ ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àOn€April€9,€1996,€Appellants€petitioned€the€court€for€approval€of€fees,€seeking€payment€forÐ ¬ü  Ðtheir€activities€as€executors,€members€of€the€FWC€board€of€directors,€and€accountants€and€lawyersÐ ˜è  Ðfor€the€estate.€€They€sought€interim€payments€of€$120,000€to€be€equally€divided€among€the€co„Ð „Ô  Ðexecutors,€and€an€hourly€fee€of€$125€for€their€work€on€the€board€of€directors.€€On€October€18,€1996,Ð pÀ Ðthe€probate€court€entered€a€consent€order€approving€payment€of€an€interim€co„executorsðð€fee€ofÐ \¬ Ð$150,000€to€be€divided€equally€among€the€three€co„executors.€The€order€also€approved€payments€ofÐ H˜ Ðlegal€and€accounting€fees.€€Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àOn€March€7,€1997,€Appellants€sought€approval€of€another€interim€payment€of€executorsðð€feesÐ  \ Ðof€over€$91,000,€which€request€had€increased€to€$232,303€by€the€time€of€its€hearing.€€The€adultÐ øH Ðbeneficiaries€filed€an€objection€to€this€request,€arguing€that€the€co„executors€had€already€receivedÐ ä4 Ðsubstantial€compensation€and€that€the€estate€was€experiencing€cash€flow€problems.׃t´×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€ShortlyÐ Ð  Ðthereafter,€€the€adult€beneficiaries€filed€a€petition€for€construction€of€will,€seeking€instruction€onÐ ¼  Ðwhether€they€could€contest€the€fees€sought€by€Appellants€without€triggering€the€òòin€terroremóó€clause.Ð ¨ø ÐThe€beneficiaries€argued€that€in€calculating€the€compensation€as€equal€to€that€ð ðcustomarily€chargedÐ ”ä Ðby€NationsBank,ðð€€reliance€on€the€printed€fee€schedule€should€only€be€a€starting€point€for€calculatingÐ €Ð Ðfees€because€parties€in€sizeable€estates€customarily€negotiate€and€settle€on€fees€smaller€than€thoseÐ l¼ Ðprovided€by€strict€application€of€the€schedule.€Ð X ¨ Ðâ âÐ D!” Ðà  àAppellants€responded€to€the€beneficiariesðð€petition€for€construction€of€the€will€by€denyingÐ ° Ðâ âthat€the€beneficiaries€could€seek€instructions€with€respect€to€the€òòin€terroremóó€clause,€arguing€thatÐ œì Ðdoing€so€defeated€the€clauseððs€purpose.€They€also€filed€a€counterclaim,€seeking€a€declaratoryÐ ˆØ Ðjudgment€enforcing€the€òòin€terrorem€óóclause,€which€would€result€in€revocation€of€bequests€to€thoseÐ tÄ Ðbeneficiaries€who€filed€the€petition€for€construction.€Ð `° ÐÌà  àOn€June€27,€1997,€the€probate€court,€on€its€own€initiative,€held€a€status€conference.€€At€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðoutset,€the€court€observed,€ð ðI€have€continued€to€see€fee€requests€that€are€not€modest€.€.€.€and€I€haveÐ $ t Ðgotten€the€clear€indication€that€some€beneficiaries€are€reluctant,€if€not€scared,€to€bring€matters€to€thisÐ  ` Ðcourtððs€attention.ðð€Ô‡XXXXÔ€During€this€hearing,€the€court€approved€the€beneficiariesðð€decision€to€retain€twoÐ ü L  Ðindependent€financial€advisors€and€granted€a€30„day€stay€on€discovery€to€allow€them€to€seek€loansÐ è 8  Ðto€pay€the€remainder€of€the€estate€taxes.€€Ô#†XXXXC#ÔÔ‡XXXXÔAt€the€hearing,€Ô#†XXXXND#ÔÔ‡XXXXÔAppellants€acknowledged€the€adultÐ Ô$  Ðbeneficiariesðð€desire€for€their€resignation,€but€argued€that€their€resignation€would€not€be€in€theÐ À  Ðestateððs€best€interest.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€Ô#†XXXX D#ÔÔ‡XXXXÔ€However,€Mr.€Pursell€ultimately€agreed€to€resign€as€co„executor€(afterÐ ¬ü  Ðadmitted,€off„the„record€€encouragement€by€the€probate€court)€on€condition€that€the€parties€agreedÐ ˜è  Ðto€indemnify€him€and€hold€him€harmless.€€Mr.€Whisenant€resigned€shortly€thereafter.Ð „Ô  ÐÔ#†XXXXF#ÔÔ‡XXXXÔÌÔ#†XXXX}G#Ôà  àAfter€Appellantsðð€resignation,€the€issue€of€additional€fees€remained.€€The€beneficiaries€filedÐ \¬ Ða€memorandum€responding€to€Appellantsðð€application€for€approval€of€interim€and€final€co„executorsððÐ H˜ Ðfees,€objecting€to€the€award€of€additional€fees€to€Appellants.€€Ultimately,€the€court€heard€nine€daysÐ 4„ Ðof€testimony€and€argument€on€Appellantsðð€second€fee€request€and€the€beneficiariesðð€response€theretoÐ  p Ðover€a€period€of€almost€five€months.€€At€the€conclusion€of€these€proceedings,€the€court€entered€anÐ  \ Ðorder€denying€Appellantsðð€application€for€additional€fees,€stating€ð ðthey€shall€recover€nothing€furtherÐ øH Ðfrom€this€estate.ðð€€The€order€specifically€incorporated€the€oral€findings€made€by€the€court€at€theÐ ä4 Ðconclusion€of€the€hearing.€€Those€findings€include€the€following€observation:€Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àThe€real€fly€in€the€ointment€here€starts,€number€one,€with€the€lack€of€independentÐ ¨ø Ðadvice€and€counsel€when€a€very€complicated€fee€arrangement€was€proposed.€€I€knowÐ ”ä ÐMr.€Whisenant€said€it,€that€Mr.€Wakefield€said€no€to€one€or€more€proposed€feeÐ €Ð Ðschedules€.€.€.€and€then€finally,€when€a€fee€schedule€was€suggested€similar€to€that€ofÐ l¼ Ða€bank,€and€I€think€they€presented€NationsBank€and€one€other€bankððs,€I€believe€Mr.Ð X ¨ ÐWhisenant€and/or€Mr.€Pursell€suggested€that€Mr.€Wakefieldððs€response€was,€ð ðThatððsÐ D!” Ðgood.€€Thatðð€simple.€€Thatððs€the€way€I€want€it.ðð€And€I€believe€that€Mr.€Wakefield€didÐ 0"€  Ðjust€want€something€simple;€lay€it€out€there€and€letððs€do€it€that„a„way.€€But€thereððsÐ #l! Ðtwo€problems€here.€€No€one€thoroughly€explained€„„€the€evidence€is€that€no€one€ofÐ $X" Ðindependent€authority€explained€the€fee€schedule€to€him.€€And€particularly€Mr.Ð ô$D # ÐWhisenant,€I€think,€did€a€good€job€of€trying€to€explain€the€fee€schedule€to€Mr.Ð à%0!$ ÐWakefield,€and€my€notes€indicated€that€he€even€ran€a€few€numbers€for€him,€but€thereÐ Ì&"% Ðwas€no€testimony€from€anyone€that€there€was€an€explanation€of€what€extraordinaryÐ ° Ðservices€are€or€how€they€would€be€computed€or€how€much€they€might€be.€€Even€toÐ œì Ðthe€contrary,€the€evidence€suggests€that€the€executors€went€to€Mr.€Jonathan€Harwell,Ð ˆØ Ðan€officer€with€NationsBank€Trust€Department,€or€former€officer,€I€donððt€know,€andÐ tÄ Ðeven€needed€his€assistance€to€explain€how€itððs€done.€€And€if€thatððs€the€case,€then€Mr.Ð `° ÐWakefield€could€have€never€understood€it€.€.€.€I€feel€strongly€that,€based€on€theÐ L œ Ðevidence€Iððve€heard€for€eight€days,€that€no€one€was€able€to€explain€to€Lou€WakefieldÐ 8 ˆ Ðwhat€that€NationsBank€fee€schedule€really€meant.€€And€nobodyððs€been€able€to€explainÐ $ t Ðto€me€when€„„€when€a€service€is€an€extraordinary€service€or€when€itððs€not,€and€Iððd€likeÐ  ` Ðto€think€Iððm€of€above€average€intelligence.€€Combine€the€extraordinary€services€withÐ ü L  Ðthe€fact€that€youððve€got€„„€and€Iððm€not€saying€this€is€improper€„„€but€youððve€got€whatÐ è 8  ÐI€would€say€[is]€double„dipping:€you€have€executorððs€fees,€directorððs€fees,€you€haveÐ Ô$  Ðother€fees,€itððs€just€so€hard€to€accept€the€fact€that€then€there€can€be€a€third€or€fourthÐ À  Ðor€fifth€category€of€income€called€ð ðextraordinary€services,ðð€so€I€have€a€seriousÐ ¬ü  Ðproblem€with€that.Иè Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€court€then€found€that€the€NationsBank€fee€schedule,€which,€in€large€part,€was€premisedÐ pÀ Ðon€percentages€of€estate€assets€and€income,€was€no€longer€applicable€because€Appellants€hadÐ \¬ Ðresigned.€€The€court€reasoned:Ð H˜ ÐÌà8  àSince€they€did€resign,€itððs€impractical€to€apply€the€percentages,€and€a€percent€of€thisÐ  p Ðand€percent€of€that.€€And€that,€combined€with€the€lack€of€independent€advice€andÐ  \ Ðcounsel,€both€of€those€together€are€sufficient€for€me€to€state€that€the€schedule€is€nowÐ øH Ðinapplicable,€and€I€do€not,€will€not€award€them€fees€pursuant€to€the€NationsBankÐ ä4 Ðschedule€for€those€reasons.ÐÐ Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€court€declined€to€require€Appellants€to€disgorge€the€$50,000€they€each€had€previouslyÐ ¨ø Ðreceived€pursuant€to€the€agreed€order€resolving€their€initial€fee€request,€but€ordered€Mr.€Pursell€toÐ ”ä Ðdisgorge€the€sum€of€$70,625,€part€of€fees€paid€to€him€for€legal€services€to€FWC.€€Some€factualÐ €Ð Ðbackground€is€necessary€at€this€point.Ð l¼ ÐÌà  àPrior€to€the€testatorððs€death,€€Mr.€Pursell€was€on€retainer€to€FWC.€€Under€their€arrangement,€Ð D!” ÐFWC€€paid€Mr.€Pursell€a€$3,000€monthly€retainer€for€legal€services€up€to€forty€(40)€hours.€€When€Mr.Ð 0"€  ÐPursell€worked€more€than€forty€(40)€hours€in€a€month,€the€corporation€paid€him€at€the€rate€of€$100Ð #l! Ðper€hour.€Mr.€Pursell€charged€his€other€clients€an€hourly€fee€of€$200.€This€arrangement€continuedÐ $X" Ðafter€the€testatorððs€death,€apparently€with€the€consent€of€the€board€of€directors€of€FWC,€of€which€Mr.Ð ô$D # ÐPursell€was€a€member.€Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà  àMr.€Whisenant€had€a€similar€retainer€arrangement€with€the€testator.€€He€provided€€personalÐ ¸'#& Ðaccounting€and€tax€planning€services€to€the€testator,€and€his€accounting€firm€received€a€monthlyÐ ¤(ô#' Ðretainer€from€FWC€of€$4,000.€€His€firm€audited€FWCððs€financial€statements,€books€and€records,€andÐ )à$( Ðprovided€extensive€management€advisory€services.€At€each€yearððs€end,€the€amount€of€the€retainerÐ |*Ì%) Ð($48,000)€was€compared€to€the€number€of€hours€actually€worked€and,€if€it€was€less€than€$48,000,Ð h+¸&* ÐFWC€was€given€a€credit€for€the€following€year.€€The€firm€continued€to€provide€services€to€FWC€afterÐ ° Ðtestatorððs€death,€again€apparently€with€the€consent€of€the€three„member€board,€of€which€Mr.Ð œì ÐWhisenant€was€a€member.Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àThe€courtððs€oral€findings€explain€Ô_ÔitsÔ_Ô€reasoning€in€regard€to€its€order€that€Mr.€Pursell€returnÐ `° Ðsome€of€the€fees€he€received€under€his€retainer€agreement€with€FWC€after€testatorððs€death:Ð L œ ÐÌà8  àAs€for€Mr.€Pursellððs€fee,€which€I€believe€was€an€additional€$3,000€per€month€as€theÐ $ t Ðattorney€for€the€corporation€„„€which€I€understand€would€be€in€addition€to€theÐ  ` Ðdirectorððs€fee€.€.€.€the€evidence€did€establish€that€that€was€an€arrangement€consistentÐ ü L  Ðwith€what€he€and€Mr.€Wakefield€had€while€Mr.€Wakefield€was€alive.€€It€appeared€toÐ è 8  Ðbe€a€very€reasonable€agreement,€and€one€thatððs€not€at€all€uncommon,€particularlyÐ Ô$  Ðamong€lawyers€and€clients€who€have€a€longstanding€relationship.€€The€problem€is,Ð À  Ðafter€Mr.€Wakefieldððs€death,€a€lot€of€things€changed.€€Not€only€was€the€client€notÐ ¬ü  Ðthere€anymore,€the€attorney€was€really€the€client€after€Mr.€Wakefieldððs€death.€€Also,Ð ˜è  Ðthe€attorney,€Mr.€Pursell,€was€receiving€a€co„executorððs€fee.€€Also,€Mr.€Pursell€wasÐ „Ô  Ðreceiving€a€directorððs€fee.€€Also,€Mr.€Pursellððs€firm,€which€rendered€valuable€servicesÐ pÀ Ðthrough€partners€and€other€associates,€they€rendered€services€and€theyððve€been€paidÐ \¬ Ðfor€those€services.€€With€all€of€those€matters€considered,€it€seems€unreasonable€„„€thatÐ H˜ Ðfee€arrangement€of€$3,000€per€month€to€Ron€Pursell€on€a€retainer€agreement,€to€meÐ 4„ Ðappears€to€be€clearly€unreasonable,€and€that€entire€amount€is€denied.€€And€to€whatÐ  p Ðextent€it€exceeds€whatever€else€heððs€entitled€to,€must€be€regorged.€Ð \Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€two€co„executors€contest€the€courtððs€rulingsòòóó.€€In€a€cross„appeal,€the€beneficiaries€argueÐ ä4 Ðthat€the€probate€court€erred€in€denying€their€request€that€additional€fees€be€disgorged.€€Because€thisÐ Ð  Ðcase€was€tried€in€the€probate€court€without€a€jury,€€the€standard€of€review€is€òòde€novoóó€upon€the€recordÐ ¼  Ðwith€a€presumption€of€correctness€as€to€the€findings€of€fact,€unless€the€preponderance€of€the€evidenceÐ ¨ø Ðis€otherwise.€€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(d);€òòCross€v.€City€of€Memphisóó,€20€S.W.3d€642,€645€(Tenn.€2000).Ð ”ä ÐFurthermore,€great€weight€must€be€given€to€the€factual€findings€made€by€the€trial€court€that€rest€onÐ €Ð Ðdeterminations€of€credibility.€€òòRandolph€v.€Randolph,óó€937€S.W.2d€815,€819€(Tenn.€1996).€TheÐ l¼ Ðpresumption€of€correctness€requires€us€to€accept€the€trial€courtððs€findings€of€fact€unless€the€aggregateÐ X ¨ Ðweight€of€the€evidence€demonstrates€that€a€finding€of€fact€other€than€the€one€found€by€the€trial€courtÐ D!” Ðis€more€probably€true.€òò€Estate€of€Haynes€v.€Bradenóó,€835€S.W.2d€19,€19„20€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1992)Ð 0"€  Ð(holding€that€an€appellate€court€is€bound€to€respect€a€trial€courtððs€findings€if€it€cannot€determine€thatÐ #l! Ðthe€evidence€preponderates€otherwise).€€To€the€extent€that€the€determination€of€the€issues€rests€onÐ $X" Ðissues€of€law,€they€receive€plenary€review.€€òòMyint€v.€Allstate€Ins.€Coóó.,€970€S.W.2d€920,€924€(Tenn.Ð ô$D # Ð1998).Ð à%0!$ ÐÌÐ  ¸'#& Ðà@11ìàI.€€The€Compensation€RequestˆÐ ° ÐÌà  àAfter€resignation€by€Appellants€and€after€various€other€matters€were€resolved,€the€onlyÐ ˆØ Ðoutstanding€issues€involved€a€final€accounting€by€the€resigning€co„executors,€Appellants,€and€theirÐ tÄ Ðrequest€for€additional€compensation.׃–×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð `° ÐÌà  àThe€beneficiaries€responded€to€the€petition€by€asserting€(1)€the€court€should€apply€aÐ 8 ˆ Ðreasonableness€standard€to€the€fees€requested;€(2)€any€fee€request€based€on€the€value€of€the€estateððsÐ $ t Ðcorpus€must€be€examined€in€the€context€of€the€resignation€of€the€executors,€prior€to€closing€of€theÐ  ` Ðestate,€and€appointment€of€a€successor€executor;€(3)€the€considerations€applicable€to€professionalÐ ü L  Ðfees€should€be€applied€to€executor€fees€where€the€professional€is€acting€as€both€executor€and€lawyerÐ è 8  Ðor€accountant,€and€that€standard€is€ð ðreasonablenessðð;€(4)€it€is€impossible€to€determine€what€feesÐ Ô$  ÐNationsBank€would€have€charged€in€this€instance€because€it€was€not€unusual€for€the€bank€toÐ À  Ðnegotiate€a€deviation€from€the€schedule€for€large€estates;€(5)€the€compensation€provision€in€the€will,Ð ¬ü  Ðespecially€when€combined€with€the€òòin€terroremóó€clause€as€interpreted€by€Appellants,€was€beneficialÐ ˜è  Ðto€Appellants,€both€of€whom€participated€in€the€drafting€of€the€will€and€were€in€fiduciaryÐ „Ô  Ðrelationships€with€the€testator,€with€the€result€that€Appellants€had€the€burden€of€establishing€by€clearÐ pÀ Ðand€convincing€evidence€that€the€provision€was€not€the€result€of€undue€influence;€(6)€the€courtÐ \¬ Ðshould€consider€the€totality€of€fees€and€compensation€paid€to€Appellants€in€their€various€roles€inÐ H˜ Ðrelation€to€testatorððs€affairs;€and€(7)€because€an€excessive€fee€has€been€charged€or€sought,€AppellantsÐ 4„ Ðwere€entitled€to€no€fees.€€The€beneficiaries€asserted€the€fees€were€excessive€and€unreasonable.׃€d×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð  p ÐÌà  àAppellants€replied€by€asserting€(1)€they€sought€to€be€paid€in€accordance€with€the€terms€of€theÐ øH Ðwill;€(2)€the€intent€of€the€testator€regarding€compensation€is€paramount€and€must€be€effectuated;€andÐ ä4 Ð(3)€the€only€issue€for€consideration€by€the€court€was€the€extent€of€ð ðextraordinary€servicesðð€whichÐ Ð  Ðentitled€Appellants€to€compensation€beyond€the€percentage€fees.€€Appellants€stated€they€wouldÐ ¼  Ðpresent€to€the€court€ð ðtheir€time€records€indicating€services€rendered€by€them€as€co„executors,Ð ¨ø Ðdirectors,€as€legal€counsel€and€accountants,€for€review€and€consideration€by€the€Court,€in€making€anÐ ”ä Ðindependent€determination€as€to€whether€or€not€extraordinary€services€were€performed.ðð€€They€alsoÐ €Ð Ðdescribed€their€efforts€on€behalf€of€the€estate€and€their€activities€regarding€a€number€of€issues,€forÐ l¼ Ðexample,€the€ESOP€proposal.Ð X ¨ Ðâ âÐ D!” ÐÔ‡lXXXXÔà  àThe€motion€for€additional€fees€was€amended€to€result€in€a€final€request€for€an€additionalÐ ° Ðâ â$232,303€in€co„executor€fees.€€That€request€was€based€upon€the€NationsBank€Fee€Schedule׃~×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€andÐ œì Ðrequested:Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  à$120,902€à0 ¸ àà0¸ (#¸ (#àFee€based€on€the€scheduleððs€stepped€percentages€to€the€gross€estateÐ`°(#(# Ðà  à€€161,889à0 ¸ àà0¸ (#¸ (#àFee€based€on€scheduleððs€6%€charge€on€income€to€the€estate.ÐL œ(#(# Ðà  à€€€€32,820à0 ¸ àà0¸ (#¸ (#àFee€for€sale€of€real€estate,€computed€at€3%€for€broker„assisted€salesÐ8 ˆ(#(# Ðà  à________à ¸ àà  àAnd€7%€on€unassisted€saleÐ $ t Ðà  à$315,611Ð  ` Ðà  à„òò150,000óóà0 ¸ àà0¸ (#¸ (#àLess€interim€fees€already€paidÐü L (#(# Ðà  à$165,611Ð è 8  Ðà  à€€Ð Ô$  Ðà  à€€€€29,962à0 ¸ àà0¸ (#¸ (#àFees€for€ð ðextraordinary€servicesðð€by€Mr.€Pursell(239.7€hours)ÐÀ (#(# Ðà  à€€€€36,730à0 ¸ àà0¸ (#¸ (#àFees€for€ð ðextraordinary€servicesðð€by€Mr.€Whisenant€(293.6€hours)Ьü (#(# Ðà  à_________Ð ˜è  Ðà  à$232,303à0 ¸ àà0¸ (#¸ (#àTotal€additional€fees€requestedÐ„Ô (#(# Ðà  àÔ#†XXXlXV|#ÔÌà  àAt€the€beginning€of€the€hearing,€counsel€for€Appellants€stated€the€request€was€for€anÐ \¬ Ðadditional€$165,611;€obviously€that€amount€did€not€include€fees€for€extraordinary€services.€Ð H˜ ÐAppellants€took€the€position€that€there€could€be€no€question€about€their€entitlement€to€an€additionalÐ 4„ Ð$165,611€because€of€the€application€of€the€percentage€computations€under€the€NationsBank€feeÐ  p Ðschedule.€€During€the€course€of€the€hearing,€Appellants€also€testified€about€additional€services,Ð  \ Ðbeyond€those€required€in€ð ðordinaryðð€estate€administration,€for€which€they€claimed€$125€per€hour€asÐ øH Ðð ðextraordinary€servicesðð€under€the€fee€schedule.€Ð ä4 ÐÌà  àThe€beneficiaries€clarified€their€position€regarding€the€fee€request,׃•(×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€stating,€in€part:Ð ¼  ÐÌà8  àWe€think€that€there€are€issues€before€the€Court€that€[counsel€for€Appellants]€intendsÐ ”ä Ðto€explore€fully€and€we€certainly€intend€to€explore€fully.€€The€use€of€a€fee€scheduleÐ €Ð Ðin€conjunction€with€the€in€terrorem€clause€we€believe€was€a€conflict€of€interest.€€TheÐ l¼ Ðpursuit€of€the€sale€a€conflict€„€„€of€the€ESOP€trust€we€believe€was€a€conflict€ofÐ X ¨ Ðinterest.€€We€think€there€were€multiple€billings€and€fee€arrangements€between€theÐ D!” Ðparties€and€various€entities€which€they€controlled,€as€a€result€of€their€fiduciaryÐ 0"€  Ðpositions€and€without€there€being€any€check€or€balance,€particularly€with€regard€toÐ ° Ðpayment€of€directorsðð€fees€for€a€company€for€which€they€were€directors.€€We€thinkÐ œì Ðthat€in€total€the€fee€request€is€excessive€commensurate€with€the€work€done€and€theÐ ˆØ Ðvalue€provided,€and€then€also€in€connection€with€the€totality€of€the€fees€beingÐ tÄ Ðassessed.Ð`°Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€proof€at€the€hearing€provided€details€of€the€totality€of€fees€paid€to€Appellants€for€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðseveral€fiduciary€positions€during€the€approximately€thirty€months€Ô‡lXXXXÔfrom€the€testatorððs€death€inÐ $ t ÐDecember€1994€until€their€resignation€as€co„executors,€co„trustees,€and€company€directors,€in€lateÐ  ` ÐJune€of€1997.€€During€that€period,€Appellants€and€their€firms€were€paid€a€total€of€$623,114€for€theirÐ ü L  Ðservices€in€several€capacities:€executors€and€trustees,€directors€of€the€company,€attorney€andÐ è 8  Ðaccountant€for€the€estate,€and€attorney€and€accountant€for€the€company.€€Mr.€Pursell€or€his€firm€wasÐ Ô$  Ðpaid€a€total€of€$311,707.€€Mr.€Whisenant€or€his€firm€received€a€total€of€$311,407.€Ð À  ÐÌà  àEach€was€paid€$50,000€in€executor€and€trustee€fees€in€accordance€with€the€agreed€orderÐ ˜è  Ðapproving€the€initial€interim€fee€request.€€In€addition,€each€received€substantial€payments€for€theirÐ „Ô  Ðservices€as€directors€of€FWC,€with€Mr.€Pursell€being€paid€$135,232,€and€Mr.€Whisenant€receivingÐ pÀ Ð$123,684.׃‹×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Mr.€Pursellððs€firm€was€paid€$26,683€for€its€services€as€counsel€for€the€estate€until€theÐ \¬ Ðfirmððs€resignation€in€May€1996.€€Mr.€Pursell€was€paid€$90,000€under€his€retainer€arrangement€withÐ H˜ ÐFWC,€at€$3,000€per€month€for€thirty€months.€€Mr.€Pursellððs€law€firm€was€paid€another€$9,792€forÐ 4„ Ðservices€to€FWC€on€an€hourly€basis,€apparently€outside€the€retainer€arrangement.׃ ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô‡lôæ òXlXÔÔ#†ôæ òòlôæ Ç‹#Ô€€Ô#†XXòôæ (’#ÔSimilarly,€Mr.Ð  p ÐWhisenantððs€firm€received€$55,113€for€accounting€services€provided€to€the€estate€and€$82,610€forÐ  \ Ðsuch€services€provided€to€FWC.€Ô‡lXXXXÔÐ øH ÐÌà  àIn€Appellantsðð€submissions€and€at€the€hearing,€Mr.€Pursell€testified€and€presented€timeÐ Ð  Ðrecords€reflecting€that€he€had€expended€475.9€hours€as€co„executor€ð ðover€and€above€any€time€spentÐ ¼  Ðas€a€member€of€the€Board€of€Directors€or€for€legal€services€provided€to€Feldkircher€Wire€FabricatingÐ ¨ø ÐCo.,€Inc.ðð€€As€indicated€above,€Mr.€Pursell€considered€239.7€of€those€hours€to€have€been€spent€onÐ ”ä Ðextraordinary€services.€€Similarly,€Mr.€Whisenant€testified€that€he€spent€496.3€hours€on€co„executorÐ €Ð Ðduties,€as€opposed€to€duties€of€his€other€roles,€and€293.6€of€those€hours€were€for€extraordinaryÐ l¼ Ðservices.Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àThe€courtððs€specific€rulings€were:Ð 0"€  ÐÌÓ€ (5h83qÓà  à1.€€Because€of€the€complexities€of€the€fee€schedule€and€the€courtððs€conclusion€that€the€testatorÐ $X" Ðnever€understood€those€complexities,€and€because€of€the€difficulty€in€justifying€fees€forÐ ô$D # Ðð ðextraordinary€servicesðð€as€executors€in€view€of€the€other€fees€charged,€the€court€denied€that€portionÐ ° Ðof€the€fee€request€for€extraordinary€services.׃‰×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð œì ÐÌà  à2.€The€percentage€fee€schedule€type€of€arrangement€contemplates€the€executors€will€completeÐ tÄ Ðthe€administration€of€the€estate.€€Because€Mr.€Pursell€and€Mr.€Whisenant€resigned€before€the€estateÐ `° Ðwas€settled,€application€of€the€percentages€in€the€fee€schedule€was€not€practical.€€For€that€reason,€andÐ L œ Ðbecause€of€the€lack€of€independent€advice€to€the€testator€regarding€fiduciary€compensation,€the€courtÐ 8 ˆ Ðdetermined€the€fee€schedule€was€inapplicable€and€refused€to€award€fees€using€that€schedule.Ð $ t ÐÌà  à3.€In€response€to€the€beneficiariesðð€challenge€to€the€attorneyððs€fees€of€$3000€per€month€paidÐ ü L  Ðto€Mr.€Pursell€for€services€to€the€corporation,€the€court€determined€that€the€monthly€retainer€feeÐ è 8  Ðarrangement€was€clearly€unreasonable€because€Mr.€Pursell,€as€director,€was€the€client€as€well€as€theÐ Ô$  Ðattorney,€because€Mr.€Pursell€was€also€receiving€a€directorððs€fee,€and€because€Mr.€Pursellððs€firm€wasÐ À  Ðpaid€for€legal€services€outside€the€retainer.€€The€court€denied€the€entire€retainer€fee€amount€andÐ ¬ü  Ðrequired€repayment€of€any€amount€exceeding€ð ðwhatever€else€heððs€entitled€to.ðð€€Based€upon€timeÐ ˜è  Ðrecords€for€hours€actually€spent€by€Mr.€Pursell€in€providing€legal€services€to€FWC,€that€amount€wasÐ „Ô  Ðdetermined€to€be€the€$70,625€requested€by€the€beneficiaries€as€exceeding€the€value€of€the€servicesÐ pÀ Ðrendered.Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àThe€court€also€made€clear€it€was€not€disturbing€the€previously€awarded€interim€fees,€but€heldÐ 4„ Ðthat€the€$50,000€each€of€the€co„executors€received€pursuant€to€that€agreed€order€ð ðwould€be€theÐ  p Ðentirety€of€their€co„executorsðð€fee.ððÔ#†XXXlXI“#ÔÐ  \ ÐÌÓ  ÓII.€The€Trial€Courtððs€Authority€Over€Executor€and€Trustee€FeesÐ ä4 ÐÓì ÓÌà  àWe€begin€our€analysis€with€discussion€of€the€general€framework€for€consideration€of€requestsÐ ¼  Ðfor€compensation€for€executor€and€trustee€services.€€Generally,€executors€are€entitled€to€reasonableÐ ¨ø Ðcompensation€for€their€services€and€to€payment€for€reasonable€expenses€incurred€in€good€faith€forÐ ”ä Ðthe€necessary€benefit€of€the€estate.€€òòIn€Re€Estate€of€Wallaceóó,€829€S.W.2d€696,€700„01€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ð €Ð Ð1992);€òòsee€óóTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€30„2„606€(1996).€€The€determination€of€reasonableness€is€left,€in€theÐ l¼ Ðfirst€instance,€to€the€discretion€of€the€trial€court,€which€is€to€make€that€determination€in€light€of€allÐ X ¨ Ðthe€relevant€circumstances.€€òòIdóó.€at€701;€òòIn€Re€Estate€of€Griffithóó,€452€S.W.2d€895,€902€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ð D!” Ð1969).€€Thus,€where€the€will€is€silent€regarding€compensation€for€an€executor,€ð ðthe€executors€shallÐ 0"€  Ðbe€credited€with€a€reasonable€compensationðð€as€determined€by€the€court.€€òòIn€Re€Estate€of€Perlbergóó,Ð #l! Ð694€S.W.2d€304,€307€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1984)€(quoting€òòLeach€v.€Cowanóó,€125€Tenn.€182,€195,€140Ð $X" ÐS.W.1070,€1074€(1911)).Ð ô$D # Ðâ âÐ à%0!$ Ðà  àWhere,€however,€the€testator€has€established€the€compensation€of€the€executor,€generally€ourÐ ° Ðâ âcourts€will€give€effect€to€the€testatorððs€intent€to€the€extent€it€is€ascertainable.Ð œì ÐÌà8  àIn€Tennessee€and€in€virtually€every€other€jurisdiction€that€has€addressed€the€issue,Ð tÄ Ðwhere€a€will€specifies€that€an€executor€is€to€receive€a€certain€amount€asÐ `° Ðcompensation,€or€no€compensation,€for€serving€as€an€executor,€he,€by€accepting€theÐ L œ Ðappointment,€binds€himself€to€the€willððs€terms.€€Ð8 ˆÐ Ð  ÐÌòòIn€Re€Estate€of€Perlbergóó,€694€S.W.2d€at€306.׃m×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€This€rule€is€based€upon€the€paramount€importanceÐ  ` Ðgiven€to€the€testatorððs€intent.€€In€Tennessee,Ð ü L  ÐÌà8  àð ð[t]he€cardinal€rule€for€interpreting€and€construing€a€last€will€and€testament€is€theÐ Ô$  Ðascertainment€of€the€intent€of€the€testator.€That€intent,€when€known,€will€be€givenÐ À  Ðeffect€unless€prohibited€by€some€rule€of€law€or€public€policy.ðð€€òòIn€Re€Walkeróó,€849Ð ¬ü  ÐS.W.2d€766,€768€(Tenn.€1993);€òòCowden€v.€Sovran€Bank/Central€Southóó,€816€S.W.2dÐ ˜è  Ð741,€744€(Tenn.€1991).€So,€the€clear€intent€of€the€testator€will€govern€unless€it€isÐ „Ô  Ðð ðprohibited€by€some€rule€of€law€or€public€policy.ðð€òòIdóó.ÐpÀÐ Ð  ÐÌòòWinningham€v.€Winninghamóó,€966€S.W.2d€48,€50€(Tenn.€1998).€€€Our€law€makes€it€clear€that€theÐ H˜ Ðtestatorððs€intent€is€ð ðof€paramount€importance.ðð€òòId.óó€€We€must€ascertain€the€testatorððs€intent€from€theÐ 4„ Ðparticular€words€used€in€the€will€itself,€from€the€context€in€which€those€words€are€used,€and€from€theÐ  p Ðgeneral€scope€and€purposes€of€the€will,€read€in€the€light€of€the€surrounding€and€attendingÐ  \ Ðcircumstances;€òòMoore€v.€Neelyóó,€212€Tenn.€496,€502-03,€370€S.W.2d€537,€540€(1963);€òòsee€also€ThirdÐ øH ÐNatððl€Bank€of€Nashville€v.€First€Am.€Natððl€Bank€of€Nashvilleóó,€596€S.W.2d€824,€828€(Tenn.€1980).Ð ä4 ÐÌà  àBased€on€these€general€principles,€as€well€as€more€specific€authority€from€other€jurisdictions,Ð ¼  ÐAppellants€assert€that€the€trial€court€was€required€to€approve€the€requested€additional€fees€becauseÐ ¨ø Ðthe€testator€established€the€compensation€for€the€executors€in€the€will.€Ô‡lXXXXÔ€In€essence,€they€argue€thatÐ ”ä Ðthe€court€had€no€authority€to€inquire€into€the€reasonableness€of€the€fees€or€to€substitute€its€judgmentÐ €Ð Ðof€reasonable€compensation€for€that€of€the€testator.Ð l¼ ÐÔ#†XXXlXΰ#ÔÔ‡lXXXXÔÌà  àEven€assuming€that€Appellantsðð€interpretation€of€the€general€rule€is€correct,׃œd×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€we€do€notÐ D!” Ðbelieve€that€rule€prohibited€the€trial€court€from€making€the€examination€of€the€facts€andÐ 0"€  Ðcircumstances€it€made.€€First,€although€Appellants€equate€the€willððs€direction€that€the€executors€andÐ #l! Ðâ âtrustees€ð ðbe€paid€fees€equal€to€those€fees€customarily€charged€by€NationsBank€.€.€.€for€estate€and€trustÐ $X" Ðadministration€servicesðð€to€language€adopting€the€fee€schedule,€there€was€affidavit€testimony׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú15Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€to€theÐ ° Ðâ âeffect€that€bank€trust€departments€customarily€depart€from€their€printed€fee€schedules€and€negotiateÐ œì Ðother€fee€arrangements€where€large€estates€are€involved.׃}8 ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú16Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€A€probate€court€has€authority€to€determineÐ ˆØ Ðthe€intent€of€the€testator€and,€therefore,€to€examine€whether€the€testatorððs€words€ð ðcustomarilyÐ tÄ Ðchargedðð€indicated€an€intent€to€adopt€the€fee€schedule€per€se.€€Ð `° ÐÌà  àSecond,€even€if€the€testator€intended€to€adopt€the€fee€schedule,€that€schedule€is€subject€toÐ 8 ˆ Ðinterpretation,€particularly€on€the€issue€of€what€constitutes€ð ðextraordinary€servicesðð€allowing€chargesÐ $ t Ðin€addition€to€the€standard€percentage€fee.€€The€trial€court€determined€that€the€testator€was€not€fullyÐ  ` Ðand€independently€informed€about€the€meaning€of€that€provision€of€the€schedule.€€The€probateÐ ü L  Ðcourtððs€responsibility€to€interpret€and€apply€the€testatorððs€intent€required€the€court€to€inquire€into€theÐ è 8  Ðnature€of€ð ðextraordinary€servicesðð€and€the€types€of€services€provided€by€Appellants€herein€in€theirÐ Ô$  Ðvarious€roles€as€well€as€their€compensation€for€those€services.Ô#†XXXlX²#ÔÔ‡lXXXXÔ€In€fact,€Appellants€maintained€at€theÐ À  Ðbeginning€of€the€hearing€that€the€courtððs€only€role€was€to€determine€whether€extraordinary€servicesÐ ¬ü  Ðhad€been€performed,€and€the€extent€of€compensation€appropriate€for€such€services.€€Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àThe€executors€claimed€hourly€fiduciary€fees€for€ð ðextraordinary€servicesððÔ#†XXXlX®º#ÔÔ‡lXXXXÔ€under€the€feeÐ pÀ Ðschedule€while€at€the€same€time€performing€other€professional€services€for€the€estate€and€theÐ \¬ Ðcompany€and€receiving€compensation€for€those€services.€€Thus,€fiduciary€services€and€professionalÐ H˜ Ðservices€and€advice€were€being€provided€by€the€same€people,€and€questions€of€whether€particularÐ 4„ Ðservices€were€being€provided€as€a€fiduciary€or€as€a€professional€were€being€answered,€in€the€firstÐ  p Ðinstance,€by€those€same€people.€€Without€court€review,€there€would€be€no€independent€judgmentÐ  \ Ðregarding€those€answers.€€Because€fiduciaries€owe€a€duty€of€loyalty€to€the€estate€and€a€duty€of€goodÐ øH Ðfaith€dealing€to€the€beneficiaries,€òòIn€Re€Estate€of€Wallaceóó,€829€S.W.2d€at€705,€the€court€may€inquireÐ ä4 Ðinto€the€exercise€of€the€fiduciariesðð€discretion.Ô#†XXXlXi¼#ÔÔ‡lXXXXÔÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àThird,€the€trial€court€was€asked€to€apply€the€fee€schedule,€which€Appellants€argued€was€theÐ ¨ø Ðintent€of€the€testator,€to€a€situation€unforeseen€by€the€testator:€resignation€of€the€co„executors€beforeÐ ”ä Ðadministration€of€the€estate€was€complete.׃†×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú17Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€fact€that€the€trial€court€encouraged€that€resignation,Ð ° Ðas€the€court€candidly€acknowledged,€does€not€alter€the€consequence.€Ð œì ÐÌà8  àWhere€a€trustee€ceases€to€be€trustee€before€he€has€completed€the€administration€of€theÐ tÄ Ðtrust,€he€is€not€entitled€to€the€full€compensation€to€which€he€would€be€entitled€if€heÐ `° Ðhad€fully€administered€the€trust.€.€.€.€€In€such€case,€the€court€will€award€to€the€retiringÐ L œ Ðtrustee€or€his€estate€such€compensation€as€is€reasonable€under€all€the€circumstancesÐ 8 ˆ Ðfor€the€services€that€he€has€performed€.€.€.€.Ð$ tÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àIn€the€exercise€of€its€discretion€in€determining€the€amount€of€compensation€to€be€paidÐ ü L  Ðto€a€trustee€who€has€ceased€to€be€trustee€before€the€administration€of€the€trust€isÐ è 8  Ðcompleted,€the€court€may€consider€how€nearly€the€trustee€has€completed€theÐ Ô$  Ðadministration€of€the€trust,€what€services€he€has€rendered,€and€what€services€remainÐ À  Ðto€be€rendered.€.€.€.€Ð¬ü Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àThere€are€numerous€cases€in€which€the€courts€have€applied€the€rule€that€the€trusteeÐ „Ô  Ðwho€has€ceased€to€be€trustee€without€having€fully€administered€the€trust€is€entitledÐ pÀ Ðto€such€compensation€as€is€ò òreasonable€under€the€circumstances.Ð\¬Ð Ð  Ðó óÌòòAustin€Ô_ÔWakemanÔ_Ô€Scott€&€William€Franklin€Ô_ÔFratcher,TheÔ_Ô€Law€of€Trusts€óóðð€242.11,€at€311„Ð 8ˆ Ð12€(4th€ed.€1988)Ô#†XXXlX@À#ÔÔ‡lXXXXÔ€(emphasis€added).€Ð $t ÐÌà  àSimilarly,€when€an€executor€resigns,€and€that€resignation€is€approved€by€the€court,€the€courtÐ üL Ðwill€order€settlement€by€the€executor.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€30„1„112.€€Such€a€settlement€isÐ è8 Ðð ðimperative.ðð€€òò2€Jack€W.€Robinson,€Sr.€&€Jeff€Mobley,€Pritchard€on€the€Law€of€Wills€andÐ Ô$ ÐAdministration€of€Estatesóó€ðð€620,€at€139€(5th€ed.€1994).€€Any€settlement€includes€approval€of€feesÐ À Ðto€the€resigning€executor.€ò òó óWhere€an€executor€performs€partially,€compensation€should€be€setÐ ¬ü Ðproportionately€or€on€a€quantum€meruit€basis.€€6€òòWilliam€J.€Bowe€&€Douglas€H.€Parker,€PageÐ ˜è Ðon€the€Law€of€Willsóó€ðð€57.14,€at€359€(3d€ed.€1962)Ô#†XXXlX¥È#ÔÔ‡lXXXXÔ.€€Ô#†XXXlXÌ#ÔWe€agree€with€the€trial€court€that€theÐ „Ô Ðresignation€of€the€co„executors€and€co„trustees€before€completion€of€administration€of€the€estate€orÐ pÀ Ðsettlement€of€the€trust€authorized€the€trial€court€to€determine€and€award€reasonable€fees€for€executorÐ \ ¬ Ðand€trustee€services€provided€prior€to€resignation€regardless€of€the€method€of€compensationÐ H!˜ Ðestablished€in€the€will.€Ô‡lXXXXÔÐ 4"„  ÐÌÓ  ÓII.€€Confidential€and€Fiduciary€Relationships€Ð  $\" ÐÓAÎÓÌà  àWhile€we€find€the€trial€courtððs€inquiry€into€the€reasonableness€of€compensation€received€andÐ ä%4!$ Ðrequested€by€Appellants€to€be€justified€on€the€bases€set€out€above,€it€is€apparent€that€the€heart€of€theÐ Ð& "% Ðtrial€courtððs€ruling€rests€in€another€set€of€principles.€€The€trial€courtððs€findings€and€the€inquiryÐ ¼' #& Ðpreceding€those€findings€were€based,€primarily,€on€the€courtððs€concern€with€the€multiple€roles€filledÐ ¨(ø#' Ðby€Appellants€and€with€Appellantsðð€relationships€to€the€testator,€the€corporation,€and€the€estate.€Ð ”)ä$( ÐThose€roles€and€relationships€justify€the€trial€courtððs€examination€of€the€reasonableness€of€the€requestÐ ° Ðfor€additional€fees.Ð œì ÐÌà@  ìàA.€€Relationships€with€TestatorÔ#†XXXlX Î#ÔÔ‡lXXXXԈРtÄ ÐÌà  àWhile€Ô#†XXXlXÒ#Ôwe€find€no€Tennessee€law€precisely€on€point€with€the€facts€before€us,׃o×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú18Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€we€findÐ L œ Ðpersuasive,€in€light€of€Tennessee€authority€in€other€situations,€discussed€below,€the€holding€inÐ 8 ˆ ÐòòAndrews€v.€Gorbyóó,€675€A.2d€449€(Conn.€1996).€€In€that€case,€the€drafter€of€the€testatorððs€will€and€itsÐ $ t Ðcodicils€was€named€executor€and€trustee.€€Codicils€provided€for€the€executorððs€compensation€asÐ  ` Ðfollows:€ð ðthe€executor€.€.€.€shall€be€entitled€to€compensation€in€accordance€with€fees€then€payable€forÐ ü L  ÐEstate€Settlement€services€as€published€by€said€UNION€TRUST€COMPANY€in€its€then€effectiveÐ è 8  ÐPersonal€Trust€Fee€Schedule€.€.€.€.ðð€€òòGorbyóó,€675€A.2d€at€452.€€This€fee€schedule,€which€was€similarÐ Ô$  Ðto€the€schedule€relied€upon€by€Appellants€in€the€case€before€us,€€calculated€the€executorððs€fee€as€aÐ À  Ðpercentage€of€the€estateððs€valuation€for€federal€estate€tax€purposes.€€The€drafter€admitted€that€he€hadÐ ¬ü  Ðnot€discussed€the€potential€magnitude€of€his€executorððs€fee€with€the€testator.€€After€the€testatorððsÐ ˜è  Ðdeath€and€the€administration€of€the€estate,€the€drafter€ð ðclaimed€the€full€executorððs€fee€pursuant€to€theÐ „Ô  ÐUnion€Trust€schedule.ðð€€òòId.€óóat€453.€€When€the€probate€court€declined€to€award€the€drafter€the€fullÐ pÀ Ðamount€he€sought,€the€appellate€courts€were€faced€with€the€issue€we€presently€grapple€with:€whetherÐ \¬ Ðthe€probate€court€was€ð ðbound€by€the€direction€of€the€testator€in€a€will€òòóóprepared€by€the€namedÐ H˜ Ðexecutor.ðð€€òòId.óó€€The€òòGorbyóó€court€answered€that€question€in€the€negative.€€It€reasoned:Ð 4„ ÐÌà8  àWe€begin€our€analysis€with€the€fiduciary€relationship€between€the€lawyer€who€draftsÐ  \ Ðthe€will€and€the€testator.€€This€relationship€falls€within€the€attorney-client€sphere,€andÐ øH Ðthus€raises€the€concerns€typically€found€in€that€area.€ð ðThe€judicial€system€has€aÐ ä4 Ðsignificant€interest€in€regulating€attorneys€and€the€attorney-client€relationship.€.€.€.€Ð Ð  ÐIn€so€doing,€courts€have€been€mindful€that€the€relationship€between€an€attorney€andÐ ¼  Ðclient€must€involve€personal€integrity€and€responsibility€on€the€part€of€the€lawyer€andÐ ¨ø Ðan€equal€confidence€and€trust€on€the€part€of€the€client.€.€.€.€The€relationship€betweenÐ ”ä Ðan€attorney€and€his€client€is€highly€fiduciary€in€its€nature€and€of€a€very€delicate,Ð €Ð Ðexacting,€and€confidential€character,€requiring€a€high€degree€of€fidelity€and€goodÐ l¼ Ðfaith.ððÐX ¨Ð Ð  ÐÐ D!” Ðà8  àò òThis€fiduciary€relationship€has€always€demanded€a€high€degree€of€scrutiny.€ó ó€ForÐ ° Ðexample,€we€have€held€with€respect€to€the€attorney-client€relationship€in€general€thatÐ  ð Ðð ð[p]roof€of€a€fiduciary€relationship€therefore€imposes€a€twofold€burden€upon€theÐ ŒÜ Ðfiduciary.€€Once€a€[fiduciary]€relationship€is€found€to€exist,€the€burden€of€proving€fairÐ xÈ Ðdealing€properly€shifts€to€the€fiduciary.€.€.€.€Furthermore,€the€standard€of€proof€forÐ d´ Ðestablishing€fair€dealing€is€not€the€ordinary€standard€of€fair€preponderance€of€theÐ P   Ðevidence,€but€requires€proof€.€.€.€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence.€.€.€.ððÐ< ŒÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  à.€.€.€While€these€events€[surrounding€the€will€preparation]€may€reflect€a€well€placedÐ  d Ðtrust,€and€even€though€in€this€case€the€plaintiff€assumed€these€fiduciary€duties€againstÐ  P  Ðhis€wishes€at€the€testatorððs€insistence,€ò òthe€fiduciary€relationship€is€the€overridingÐ ì <  Ðconsiderationó ó.ÐÜ, Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àFurther,€although€ostensibly€the€plaintiff€was€not€a€beneficiary€under€the€will,Ð ¸  Ðcompensation€in€excess€of€that€which€is€reasonable€is,€in€the€words€of€the€SuperiorÐ ¤ô  ÐCourt,€ò òð ðthe€functional€equivalent€of€a€bequest€to€the€plaintiff.ððó ó€If€the€testator€hadÐ à  Ðwanted€to€make€such€a€bequest€to€his€attorney€who€drafted€the€will,€he€would€haveÐ €Ð Ðso€provided€in€the€will.€Therefore,€we€conclude€that€the€testator€ò òintended€to€provideÐ l¼ Ða€measure€of€reasonable€compensation€for€the€executoró ó,€and€not€a€bequest.Ð\¬Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àò òWe€conclude€that,€as€a€matter€of€public€policy,€an€attorney€who€drafts€a€willÐ 8ˆ Ðthat€names€the€attorney€as€executor€and€contains€a€fee€schedule€for€hisÐ $t Ðcompensation€as€executor€is€limited€to€reasonable€compensation,€irrespective€ofÐ ` Ðthe€schedule.ó ó€€We€note,€however,€that€a€testator€may€have€a€reasonable€expectationÐ üL Ðthat€such€a€fee€schedule€establishes€a€maximum€limit€on€executorððs€fees.€Therefore,Ð ì< Ða€reasonable€fee€may€not€exceed€the€amount€provided€in€such€schedule.€Further,€theÐ Ø( Ðburden€rests€on€the€attorney€to€prove€the€reasonableness€of€the€compensationÐ Ä Ðrequested€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence.€Ð°Ð Ð  ÐÌòòGorbyóó,€675€A.2d€at€453„54€(emphasis€added)€(citations,€parentheticals€and€footnotes€omitted).€€Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àNeither€the€conclusion€nor€the€language€used€by€the€òòGorbyóó€court€is€new€to€TennesseeÐ `!° Ðjurisprudence.€€Ð L"œ  ÐÌà8  àOwing€to€the€confidential€and€fiduciary€relation€between€an€attorney€and€his€client,Ð $$t" Ðand€to€the€influence€of€the€attorney€over€his€client,€growing€out€of€that€relation,Ð %` # ÐCourts€of€law,€and€especially€of€equity,€ò òscrutinize€most€closely€all€transactionsÐ ü%L!$ Ðbetween€an€attorney€and€his€clientó ó.€€To€sustain€a€transaction€of€advantage€toÐ ì&<"% Ðhimself€with€his€client,€the€attorney€has€the€burden€of€showing,€not€only€that€he€usedÐ Ü',#& Ðno€undue€influence,€but€that€he€gave€his€client€all€the€information€and€advice€whichÐ È($' Ðis€(sic)€would€have€been€his€duty€to€give€if€he€himself€had€not€been€interested€andÐ ´)%( Ðthat€the€transaction€was€as€beneficial€to€the€client€as€it€would€have€been€had€the€clientÐ  *ð%) Ðdealt€with€stranger.ÐŒ+Ü&*Ð Ð  ЇòòWaller,€Lansden,€Dortch,€&€Davis€v.€Haneyóó,€851€S.W.2d€131,€131„32€€(Tenn.€1992)€(quotingÐ ° ÐòòHutchinson€v.€Crowderóó,€8€Tenn.€Civ.€App.€114,€119€(1917))€(emphasis€added).Ð œì ÐÌà  àAn€attorney€enjoys€a€confidential€relationship€with€his€or€her€client€which€triggers€judicialÐ tÄ Ðscrutiny€for€fairness€of€a€transaction€wherein€the€client€bestows€a€benefit€on€the€attorney.€€òòHager€v.Ð `° ÐFitzgeraldóó,€934€S.W.2d€668,€671€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1996).€€Similarly,Ð L œ ÐÌà8  àWe€are€of€the€opinion€that€the€relationship€between€an€accountant€and€his€employerÐ $ t Ðis€analogous€to€the€relationship€between€an€attorney€and€his€client.€It€is€highlyÐ  ` Ðfiduciary€in€its€nature€and€of€a€very€delicate,€exacting,€and€confidential€character,Ð ü L  Ðrequiring€a€high€degree€of€fidelity€and€good€faith.€It€is€purely€a€personal€relation,Ð è 8  Ðinvolving€the€highest€personal€trust€and€confidence.ÐÔ$ Ð Ð  ÐÌòòFederal€Ins.€Co.€v.€Arthur€Anderson€&€Co.,óó€816€S.W.2d€328,€330€(Tenn.€1991)€(citations€omitted).Ô‡lXXXXÔ׃w×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú19Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Р¬ü  ÐA€party€who€manages€the€financial€affairs€of€another€has€a€confidential€relationship€with€that€person.€Ð ˜è  ÐòòNicholas€v.€Wrightóó,€42€Tenn.€App.€241,€245,€301€S.W.2d€540,€542€(1956).Ô#†XXXlXfñ#ÔÔ‡lXXXXÔÐ „Ô  ÐÌà  àIt€is€well€settled€law€in€Tennessee€that€where€the€facts€show€ð ðthe€existence€of€a€confidentialÐ \¬ Ðrelationship,€followed€by€a€transaction€wherein€the€dominant€party€receives€a€benefit€from€the€otherÐ H˜ Ðparty,€a€presumption€of€undue€influence€arises,€that€may€be€rebutted€only€by€clear€and€convincingÐ 4„ Ðevidence€of€the€fairness€of€the€transaction.ðð€€òòMatlock€v.€Simpsonóó,€902€S.W.2d€384,€386€(Tenn.€1995).Ð  p ÐÔ#†XXXlXÛò#ÔÔ‡lXXXXÔTherefore,€the€existence€of€a€confidential€relationship€between€the€testator€and€his€attorney€andÐ  \ Ðaccountant€at€the€time€the€will€was€drafted€and€executed,€combined€with€the€appointment€of€theÐ øH Ðattorney€and€accountant€as€fiduciaries€created€a€situation€which€authorized€the€trial€court€to€inquireÐ ä4 Ðinto€the€compensation€of€the€fiduciaries€who€were€claiming€the€benefit€of€a€will€provision€setting€Ð Ð  Ðcompensation.Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àThe€presumption€arising€from€a€beneficial€transaction€between€parties€in€a€confidentialÐ ”ä Ðrelationship€can€be€rebutted,€and€fairness€of€the€transaction€shown,€with€proof€that€the€donor€receivedÐ €Ð Ðindependent€advice.€€òòHogan€v.€Cooperóó,€619€S.W.2d€516,€519€(Tenn.€1981).€€Independent€adviceÐ l¼ Ðmeans€that€the€advisor€must€be€competent€to€provide€the€advice€and€so€disassociated€from€theÐ X ¨ Ðinterests€of€the€party€receiving€to€benefit€to€be€able€to€advise€impartially.€€òòTurner€v.€Leatheróó,€191Ð D!” ÐTenn.€292,€297,€232€S.W.2d€269,€271„72€(1950).€€Thus,€the€trial€courtððs€references€in€the€case€beforeÐ 0"€  Ðus€to€the€absence€of€independent€advice€indicate€that€the€trial€court€was€concerned€with€theÐ #l! Ðpresumptions€arising€from€transactions€between€those€in€a€confidential€relationship.Ô#†XXXlX&õ#ÔÔ‡lXXXXÔÐ $X" Ðâ âÐ ô$D # Ðà  àAppellants€adamantly€maintain€there€was€no€allegation€of€undue€influence€in€the€making€ofÐ ° Ðthe€testatorððs€will,׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú20Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€which€we€interpret€as€an€argument€that€the€issues€raised€by€the€existence€of€aÐ œì Ðâ âconfidential€relationship€were€not€properly€before€the€court.€€We€respectfully€disagree.€€We€are€awareÐ ˆØ Ðthat€the€cases€involving€a€confidential€relationship€between€a€testator€and€someone€who€benefitsÐ tÄ Ðfrom€a€will€generally€involve€the€question€of€whether€the€specific€provision€of€the€will€was€theÐ `° Ðproduct€of€undue€influence.€€However,€we€think€the€underlying€principles€and€policy€concerns€justifyÐ L œ Ðthe€courtððs€scrutiny€of€the€consequence€and€effect€of€the€testatorððs€disposition€of€a€benefit€to€a€personÐ 8 ˆ Ðwho€had€a€fiduciary€responsibility€to€the€testator€at€the€time€of€making€of€that€disposition.Ô#†XXXlXû#ÔÔ‡lXXXXÔ€€As€theÐ $ t ÐConnecticut€court€said€inòò€Gorbyóó,€and€as€Tennessee€courts€have€said,€it€is€the€fiduciary€relationshipÐ  ` Ðwhichò òÔ#†XXXlXŒÿ#Ôó ó€is€the€overriding€considerationò ò€ó óand€which€demands€a€high€degree€of€scrutiny€from€the€courts.€Ô‡lXXXXÔÐ ü L  ÐTherefore,€although€the€trial€court€made€no€finding€that€the€testator€was€unduly€influenced€in€hisÐ ì <  Ðdecision€to€include€the€compensation€provision€in€his€will,€the€court€was€within€its€authority€toÐ Ø(  Ðscrutinize€the€transaction€and€its€result€to€determine€their€fairness€and€reasonablenessÔ#†XXXlXÙ#Ô,Ô‡lXXXXÔ€including€theÐ Ä  Ðeffect€of€application€of€the€fee€schedule€to€the€estate.€Ð °  ÐÌÔ#†XXXlXv#ÔÔ‡lXXXXÔà  àIn€òòPetty€v.€Privetteóó,€818€S.W.2d€743€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1989),€this€court€determined€that€theÐ ˆØ  Ðpresumption€arising€from€a€confidential€relationship€attached€to€a€clause€ð ðbeneficial€toðð€the€attorneyÐ tÄ Ðwho€drafted€the€will€at€issue.€€òòIdóó.€at€746.€€That€beneficial€clause€relieved€the€executor,€who€was€theÐ `° Ðdrafting€attorney,€from€liability€for€any€act€or€omission€as€executor€or€trustee.€€Because€the€trial€courtÐ Lœ Ðhad€found€that€the€exculpatory€clause€was€unenforceable€as€a€matter€of€law,€this€court€remanded€theÐ 8ˆ Ðcase€to€give€the€attorney€the€opportunity€to€present€proof€to€rebut€the€presumption€and€for€furtherÐ $t Ðevidence€ð ðas€to€undue€influence,€overreaching,€or€any€abuse€of€confidential€relationship,ðð€with€theÐ ` Ðburden€on€the€attorney.׃sT×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú21Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×òò€€Id.óó€at€748.€€The€court€held€that€an€attorney€may€benefit€from€an€exculpatoryÐ üL Ðclause,€in€a€will€drafted€by€himself€or€his€firm,€if€the€attorney€proves€there€was€no€overreaching,Ð è8 Ðundue€influence,€or€abuse€of€the€fiduciary€relationship.€òò€Id.óó€at€747„48.€€The€court€also€quoted€withÐ Ô$ Ðapproval€the€following€language€from€a€Massachusetts€case:Ð À Ðâ âÐ ¬ü Ðà8  àAny€transaction€between€an€attorney€and€his€client€when€called€in€question€must€beÐ ° Ðâ âsubjected€to€careful€scrutiny€and€the€burden€is€upon€the€attorney€to€prove€that€anyÐ œì Ðinfluence€over€the€client€which€might€be€presumed€to€have€arisen€out€of€theÐ ˆØ Ðrelationship€was€neutralized€by€independent€advice€given€to€the€client€or€by€someÐ tÄ Ðother€means€so€that€there€was€no€overreaching€of€the€client€and€no€abuse€ofÐ `° Ðconfidence.ÐL œÐ Ð  ÐÌòòId.€óóat€747€(quoting€òòBarnum€v.€Fayóó,€69€N.E.2d€470,€473€(Mass.€1946).Ð $ t ÐÌÔ#†XXXlX*#ÔÔ‡lXXXXÔà  àÔ#†XXXlX° #ÔWe€think€the€provisions€of€the€testatorððs€will€herein€were€beneficial€to€Appellants€in€the€sameÐ ü L  Ðway€the€exculpatory€clause€was€beneficial€to€the€executor€in€òòPrivetteóó.€€Appellants€have€taken€theÐ è 8  Ðposition€that€insertion€of€the€method€of€compensation€removes€executor€fees€from€a€reasonablenessÐ Ô$  Ðanalysis€by€the€court,€certainly€a€benefit€to€executors.׃u×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú22Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€In€addition,€they€asserted€that€any€beneficiaryÐ À  Ðwho€sought€to€question€the€award€of€fees€under€the€fee€schedule€was€subject€to€disinheritance€underÐ ¬ü  Ðthe€òòin€terroremóó€clause.€€They€are,€consequently,€hard€pressed€to€deny€an€intended€benefit€from€theÐ ˜è  Ðlanguage€in€the€will.€€In€addition,€like€€the€court€in€òòGorbyóó,€we€find€no€intent€by€the€testator€to€pay€theÐ „Ô  Ðco„executors€more€than€an€amount€that€is€reasonable.Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àFinally,€it€is€well„settled€thatÐ H˜ ÐÌÔ‡lXXXXÔà8  àIf€the€settlor€fixed€a€rate€of€compensation€for€the€trustee€which€was€extravagantlyÐ  p Ðhigh,€and€if€the€trustee€was€influential€in€obtaining€the€insertion€of€this€clause€in€theÐ  \ Ðinstrument,€the€court€will€require€the€trustee€to€prove€the€utmost€fairness€in€hisÐ øH Ðnegotiations€on€the€subject.€€Unless€the€trustee€could€establish€that€there€was€noÐ ä4 Ðundue€influence,€fraud,€or€duress€upon€the€settlor,€and€that€the€settlor€actedÐ Ð  Ðindependently,€and€after€full€disclosure€of€his€rights€and€of€the€legal€situation€aboutÐ ¼  Ðcompensation,€the€court€will€set€aside€the€provision€and€require€the€trustee€to€beÐ ¨ø Ðcontent€with€a€sum€fixed€by€the€court€or€with€the€statutory€fee.€Ð”äÐ Ð  ÐÌòòBogert,€the€Law€of€Trusts€and€Trusteesóó,€ðð€976,€at€145€(2d€ed.€Rev.)€(1983).Ô#†XXXlX?#ÔÐ l¼ ÐÌà  àThese€authorities,€and€the€principles€underlying€them,€make€it€clear€that€the€trial€court€hadÐ D!” Ðthe€authority€and€responsibility€to€inquire€into€the€compensation€provision€and€into€theÐ 0"€  Ðreasonableness€of€the€requested€compensation.€€We€agree€with€the€trial€court€that€the€burden€ofÐ #l! Ðestablishing€the€fairness€of€the€compensation€provision,€or€the€fairness€of€the€compensation€itself,Ð $X" Ðin€view€of€the€totality€of€circumstances,€lay€with€the€fiduciaries€claiming€benefit€from€the€will.€€WeÐ ô$D # Ðaffirm€the€trial€courtððs€decision€to€award€Appellants€only€reasonable€fees.Ð à%0!$ ÐÓ  ÓÐ Ì&"% ÐÑ{OaÑâ {âѰ°Ñâ {âÑ  ÑB.€Fiduciary€Relationships€After€Death€of€TestatorÐ ° ÐÌÓèÓà  àIn€addition€to€the€confidential€relationships€existing€between€the€testator€and€his€attorney€andÐ ˆØ Ðthe€testator€and€his€accountant€at€the€time€the€will€was€drafted,€Appellants€assumed€additionalÐ tÄ Ðfiduciary€responsibilities€upon€probate€of€the€will.€€First,€they€were€appointed€co„executors€of€theÐ `° Ðestate€and€co„trustees€of€the€testamentary€trust.€€Under€principles€well„established€under€TennesseeÐ L œ Ðlaw:Ð 8 ˆ ÐÓ  ÓÌÓ  Óà8  àExecutors,€as€fiduciaries,€owe€a€duty€of€undivided€loyalty€to€the€estate€and€must€dealÐ  ` Ðwith€the€beneficiaries€in€the€utmost€good€faith.€€òòMason€v.€Pearsonóó,€668€S.W.2d€656,Ð ü L  Ð663€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1984);€òòIn€re€Cuneoððs€Estateóó,€63€Tenn.€App.€507,€515,€475Ð è 8  ÐS.W.2d€672,€676;€òòBaker€v.€Baker,óó€24€Tenn.€App.€220,€240,€142€S.W.2d€737,€750Ð Ô$  Ð(1940).€Part€of€this€duty€includes€incurring€only€those€expenses€that€are€reasonablyÐ À  Ðnecessary€for€the€proper€administration€of€the€estate.Ьü Ð Ð  ÐÌòòIn€re€Estate€of€Wallaceóó,€829€S.W.2d€at€705€(citations€updated).Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àSimilarly,Ð \¬ ÐÌà8  àThe€most€fundamental€duty€owed€by€the€trustee€to€the€beneficiaries€of€the€trust€is€theÐ 4„ Ðduty€of€loyalty.€€This€duty€is€imposed€on€the€trustee€not€because€of€any€provision€inÐ  p Ðthe€terms€of€the€trust€but€because€of€the€relationship€that€arises€from€the€creation€ofÐ  \ Ðthe€trust.€€A€trustee€is€in€a€fiduciary€to€the€beneficiaries€of€the€trust.€.€.€.€In€someÐ øH Ð[fiduciary]€relations€the€fiduciary€element€is€more€intense€than€in€others;€it€isÐ ä4 Ðpeculiarly€intense€in€the€case€of€a€trust.€€It€is€the€duty€of€a€trustee€to€administer€theÐ Ð  Ðtrust€solely€in€the€interest€of€the€beneficiaries.€€He€is€not€permitted€to€place€himselfÐ ¼  Ðin€a€position€where€it€would€be€for€his€own€benefit€to€violate€his€duty€to€theÐ ¨ø Ðbeneficiaries.ДäÐ Ð  ÐÌòòScott€&€Fratcheróó,€òòsupraóó,€ðð€170,€at€311.Ð l¼ ÐÌà  àA€trustee€must€exercise€his€or€her€discretion€in€good€faith.€€òòKrug€v.€Krugóó,€838€S.W.2d€197,Ð D!” Ð201€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1992).€€ð ðThe€trusteeððs€discretion€must€be€exercised€in€a€reasonable€way.€€ððHeÐ 0"€  Ðmust€do€what€his€honest,€disinterested,€judgment€approves€or€ought€to€approve.ðððð€€òòAlexander€v.Ð #l! ÐNelsonóó,€825€S.W.2d€106,€108€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1991)€(quoting€òòCansler€v.€Unknown€Heirs€of€Chairsóó,Ð $X" Ð35€Tenn.€App.€631,€635,€250€S.W.2d€579,€581€(1952)).€Ð ô$D # ÐÌÔ‡lXXXXÔà  àPrior€to€his€death,€the€testator€was€the€sole€shareholder,€sole€director,€president,€and€chiefÐ Ì&"% Ðexecutive€officer€of€Feldkircher€Wire€Fabricating€Company,€Inc.€€By€the€terms€of€his€will,€hisÐ ¸'#& Ðresiduary€estate,€including€his€shares€in€FWC,€became€an€asset€of€the€Wakefield€Family€Trust.€€€TheÐ ¤(ô#' Ðâ âtrust€was€to€be€terminated€within€eleven€years€of€the€testatorððs€death,€and€the€trust€assets€distributedÐ )à$( ÐÑ ïWÑâ  âÑe°Ñâ  âÑ  Ñto€the€beneficiaries,€except€that€portion€for€the€benefit€of€the€minor€beneficiaries.€€Thus,€the€companyÐ ° Ðwas€the€major€asset€of€the€trust€created€under€the€will.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú23Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€will€further€provided:Ð œì Ðâ âÌà8  àI€direct€the€co„trustees€to€continue€to€operate€the€corporation€known€as€FeldkircherÐ tÄ ÐWire€Fabricating€Company,€Inc.€€I€direct€the€co„trustees€to€designate€JudithÐ `° ÐWakefield€Sandlin,€R.H.€Pursell€and€Robert€V.€Whisenant€as€the€Board€of€DirectorsÐ L œ Ðof€the€corporation.€€Furthermore,€I€specifically€authorize€the€directors€to€sell€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðcorporation€if€the€directors€in€their€absolute€and€unlimited€discretion€deem€it€to€beÐ $ t Ðfinancially€advisable.Ð `Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àThus,€the€will€directed€the€co„trustees€to€operate€the€company.€€The€fact€that€they€also€servedÐ è 8  Ðas€directors€of€the€company€does€not€remove€their€actions€from€scrutiny€by€the€court€with€jurisdictionÐ Ô$  Ðover€the€estate.€€The€probate€court€had€jurisdiction€over€appointment€and€removal€of€the€co„trustees,Ð À  ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€35„1„101,€and€over€examination€of€an€accounting€by€a€resigning€trustee,€Tenn.Ð ¬ü  ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€35„1„107.€€Ð ˜è  ÐÔ#†XXXlX×"#ÔÌà  àThe€various€roles€assumed€by€Appellants,€and€potential€compensation€for€each€role,€createdÐ pÀ Ða€situation€wherein€the€fiduciary€was€required€to€make€decisions€which€could€potentially€benefit€theÐ \¬ Ðfiduciary.€€As€the€trial€court€observed,€the€attorney„client€relationship€between€Mr.€Pursell€and€FWCÐ H˜ Ðwas€fundamentally€changed€by€the€death€of€Mr.€Wakefield.€€As€a€director,€Mr.€Pursell€was€the€client,Ð 4„ Ðand€as€a€fiduciary€had€to€exercise€independent€judgment€in€the€selection€and€compensation€of€legalÐ  p Ðservice€providers.€€The€same€is€true€regarding€Mr.€Whisenant€and€accounting€services.Ð  \ ÐÌà  àÔ‡lXXXXÔBecause€of€the€fiduciary€duties€imposed€upon€Appellants€by€virtue€of€their€status€as€co„Ð ä4 Ðexecutors,€co„trustees,€and€directors,€the€court€had€the€authority€to€closely€scrutinize€any€transactionÐ Ð  Ðwherein€the€fiduciary€decided€to€hire€himself.€€With€regard€to€transactions€between€an€attorney€andÐ ¼  Ðclient,€Tennessee€courts€will€ð ðscrutinize€most€closelyðð€all€such€transactions.€€Ô#†XXXlXÍ-#ÔÔ‡lXXXXÔòòWaller,€Lansden,Ð ¨ø ÐDortch,€&€Davisóó,€851€S.W.2d€at€131.Ð ”ä ÐÌÔ#†XXXlXÇ/#ÔÔ‡lXXXXÔà  àÔ#†XXXlXm0#ÔIn€this€situation,€the€court€has€authority€to€examine€the€fiduciariesðð€performance€and€itsÐ l¼ Ðconsequences€to€the€estate€and€the€beneficiaries.€€Additionally,€the€burden€of€establishing€fairnessÐ X ¨ Ðin€the€transactions€properly€falls€to€the€fiduciary,€especially€where,€as€here,€the€beneficiaries€raiseÐ D!” Ðthe€issue€of€the€reasonableness€of€the€overall€compensation.Ð 0"€  ÐÌà@  ìàC.€Court€Examination€of€All€Fees€ReceivedˆÐ $X" Ðà@™™ìàby€Fiduciaries€for€ReasonablenessˆÐ ô$D # ÐÌà  àFor€all€the€reasons€set€out€above,€the€probate€court€had€authority€to€examine€the€fees€paid€to,Ð Ì&"% Ðas€well€as€requested€by,€the€fiduciaries€whose€appointment€and€resignation€were€approved€by€theÐ ¸'#& Ðcourt.€€This€examination€did€not€require€a€finding€of€undue€influence€or€any€breach€of€duty.€€No€suchÐ ¤(ô#' Ðfindings€were€made,€and€our€holding€does€not€carry€any€implication€there€was€such€conduct.€€WeÐ ° Ðmerely€hold€that€in€the€factual€circumstances€presented,€the€fees€to€be€received€by€co„executors€andÐ œì Ðco„trustees€of€a€testamentary€trust€are€subject€to€the€scrutiny€of€the€probate€court€which€has€theÐ ˆØ Ðauthority€to€oversee€the€performance€of€those€fiduciaries.€€The€probate€court€determined€theÐ tÄ Ðfiduciaries€herein€were€entitled€to€reasonable€compensation,€and€we€affirm€that€holding.Ð `° ÐÌÓ  ÓIII.€Reasonableness€of€FeesÐ 8 ˆ ÐÓ¿6ÓÌà@44ìàA.€€Executor€and€Trustee€FeesˆÐ  ` ÐÌà  àHaving€determined€that€the€trial€court€acted€within€its€authority€in€examining€the€request€forÐ è 8  Ðadditional€fees€and€in€awarding€reasonable€fees,€we€now€review€the€courtððs€determination€as€to€theÐ Ô$  Ðamount€of€reasonable€fees.€€Ô‡lXXXXÔWhen€a€court€sets€a€reasonable€fee€for€a€trustee,€it€should€take€intoÐ À  Ðaccount€ð ðthe€size€of€the€trust,€the€nature€and€number€of€the€assets,€the€income€produced,€the€time€andÐ ¬ü  Ðresponsibility€required,€the€expertise€required,€any€management€or€sale€of€real€estate€and€closely€heldÐ ˜è  Ðbusiness€interests,€any€involvement€in€litigation€to€protect€the€trust€property,€and€other€relevantÐ „Ô  Ðfactors.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€35„1„112.€€Similarly,€reasonable€compensation€to€an€executor€shouldÐ pÀ Ðbe€fixed€with€reference€to€the€entire€estate€and€services.€€òòLoftis€v.€Loftisóó,€94€Tenn.€232Ô#†XXXlXg8#ÔÔ‡lXXXXÔ,€240„241,€28Ð \¬ ÐS.W.€1091,€1093€(1895).€€Among€the€€circumstances€relevant€to€the€reasonableness€of€fees€andÐ H˜ Ðexpenses€to€be€charged€against€an€estate€are€the€extent€of€the€executorððs€responsibilities,€the€natureÐ 4„ Ðof€the€services€rendered,€the€promptness€and€adequacy€of€the€services,€and€the€value€of€benefitsÐ  p Ðconferred.€€€òòÔ#†XXXlXP;#ÔÔ‡lXXXXÔIn€Re€Estate€of€Wallaceóó,€829€S.W.2d€at€701.Ô#†XXXlX(=#Ô€€However,€all€relevant€circumstances€shouldÐ  \ Ðbe€considered.€€òòId.óó€Ð øH ÐÌà  àWe€interpret€the€trial€courtððs€rulings€herein€as€the€result€of€an€examination€of€all€fees€andÐ Ð  Ðcompensation€made€to€Appellants€as€well€as€those€included€in€the€request€for€additional€fees.€Ð ¼  ÐAlthough€Appellants€contend€otherwise,׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú24Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€we€are€in€agreement€with€the€trial€court€that€it€isÐ ¨ø Ðappropriate€to€look€to€the€total€compensation€paid€to€Appellants,€in€all€the€roles€they€assumedÐ ”ä Ðpursuant€to€the€will.€€Such€additional€roles€and€the€compensation€received€therein€are€circumstancesÐ €Ð Ðrelevant€to€the€reasonableness€of€compensation€for€services€rendered€in€one€of€the€roles.€€This€isÐ l¼ Ðespecially€true€where,€as€here,€the€decision€of€how€to€charge€the€services€(i.e.,€as€a€duty€of€whichÐ X ¨ Ðrole)€is€left€to€the€individual€seeking€compensation.Ð D!” ÐÌà  à€As€a€general€rule,€ð ða€person€who€acts€both€as€executor€and€as€trustee€is€entitled€to€suchÐ #l! Ðcompensation€as€is€reasonable€in€view€of€all€the€duties€that€he€performs.ðð€€òòScott€&€Fratcher,€òòóóÐ $X" Ðóóòòsupra,óó€ðð€242.9€at€305€(4th€ed.€1987).€€Similarly,€Ô‡lXXXXÔð ð[w]hen€an€attorney€serves€as€personalÐ ô$D # Ðrepresentative€[to€an€estate],€he€may€either€employ€other€counsel€or€furnish€his€own€professionalÐ à%0!$ Ðservices.€€Where€he€furnishes€his€own€services€and€saves€the€estate€counsel€fees€by€diligent€andÐ Ì&"% Ðefficient€legal€services€to€himself,€he€should€be€allowed€greater€compensation€than€that€ordinarilyÐ ¸'#& Ðgranted€to€an€executor€employing€other€counsel,€but€he€can€be€paid€only€in€his€capacity€as€executor,Ð ¤(ô#' Ðnot€in€both€capacities.ðð€€Robinson€&€Mobley,€òòsupra,€óóðð€863,€at€541€(citing€òòHolding€v.€Allenóó,€150Ð ° ÐTenn.€669,€266€S.W.€772€(1924)€(disapproving€in€part€òòFulton€v.€Davidsonóó,€50€Tenn.€614€(1871)).Ð œì ÐÌà  àIn€òòIn€Re€Estate€of€Perlbergóó,€694€S.W.2d€at€308,€this€court€determined€that€the€co„executorsÐ tÄ Ðwere€not€entitled,€because€of€a€specific€provision€in€the€will,€to€compensation€for€their€services€asÐ `° Ðco„executors.€€However,€the€co„executors€were€entitled€to€expenses€incurred€in€administration€of€theÐ L œ Ðestate,€including€accounting€and€legal€services€performed€by€others€on€behalf€of€the€estate.€€The€co„Ð 8 ˆ Ðexecutors€were€an€accountant€and€a€lawyer,€and€members€of€their€firms€had€performed€services€forÐ $ t Ðthe€estate.€€The€problem,€according€to€this€court,€was€that€it€was€not€possible€from€the€record€toÐ  ` Ðdifferentiate€between€those€services€rendered€as€executor,€or€which€should€have€been€rendered€asÐ ü L  Ðexecutor,€and€those€which€were€strictly€accounting€or€legal€services.€€ð ðAt€least€to€the€extent€that€[aÐ è 8  Ðlaw€firm€associate],€and€others,€performed,€and€charged€for,€executorial€services€that€were€theÐ Ô$  Ðobligation€of€[the€co„executor],€the€attorneysðð€fees€paid€by€the€estate€have€been€unreasonable.ðð€€òòIdóó.Ð À  Ðat€309.€€€We€remanded€for€hearing€and€determination€as€to€what€services€were€or€should€have€beenÐ ¬ü  Ðrendered€by€the€co„executors€as€part€of€their€duties€as€co„executors.€€For€those,€no€fees€were€to€beÐ ˜è  Ðallowed.€€For€ððstrictlyðð€€legal€or€accounting€services€performed€by€the€co„executorsðð€firms,€reasonableÐ „Ô  Ðfees€were€allowable€as€an€expense€of€administration.€€òòId.€€óóWe€interpret€this€holding€as€indicating€thatÐ pÀ Ðan€inquiry€is€required€into€the€type€of€services€rendered€and€the€classification€of€each.׃‚×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú25Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð \¬ ÐÔ#†XXXlX#C#ÔÔ‡lXXXXÔÌà  àÔ#†XXXlXþM#ÔAppellants€assert€that€during€the€thirty€month€period€from€the€death€of€the€testator€until€theÐ 4„ Ðresignations€of€Appellants,€Mr.€Pursell€spent€998.6€hours€performing€his€duties€as€a€director€of€FWCÐ  p Ðand€that€Mr.€Whisenant€spent€1,001.2€performing€those€duties.€€The€record€indicates€that€Mr.€PursellÐ  \ Ðwas€paid€$135,232€for€his€services€as€director€and€that€Mr.€Whisenant€was€paid€$123,684€as€director.Ð øH ÐÌà  àWith€regard€to€professional€services€to€FWC,€Mr.€Whisenantððs€firm€was€paid€$82,610€afterÐ Ð  Ðthe€testatorððs€death.€€Appellants€assert€these€fees€were€not€for€Mr.€Whisenantððs€time,€but€for€his€staff.Ð ¼  ÐSimilarly,€they€assert€that€any€work€done€personally€by€Mr.€Whisenant€was€not€charged€to€the€estate,Ð ¨ø Ðbut€that€the€$55,113€c