WPC47 9# .U N9 % 0 % 0 w@p 4  F 0D 0J] 0T 0^ 0hY 0r 0|3N m 0 0P 1u 0dUb BU&>U*F Uc|#^&=*,v~/va1HP LaserJet 4HPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLh'() Z 6Times New Roman Regular($74dd7TRY3' LetterY3' Letter 3' Letter 3' LetterT  }74}7!!    (n(2$ !7dd7TRY3' Letter3' 3' Letter3'T  }}!!     XX3X   `   0    EDDy?*#()*+,-./01233|xIn Re: Ernest White - opinion  : ' IB011C2 (#$  0  2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  U2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23   ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X- - d<  9p`(&Times New Roman<  9p`(Times  !#d#++\R3'\       $   X +X         _ThePublicGuardianshipfortheElderlyLaw,Tenn.CodeAnn.347101through105(1996),createdastatewideprogramofdistrictpublicguardiansforthepurposeofprotectingthedisabledelderlywhohavenowillingandresponsiblefamilymembersorfriendstocareforthem.  !#d#++\R3'\       $   X +X         _Mr.Whiteswillisnotpartofthisrecord.  !#d#++\R3'\       $   X +X         _SeeTenn.CodeAnn.186106(8)through106(14)(1994),186107(1994),186110(1994),3411131(1996),and3413108(e)(1996). K !#d#++\R3'\       $   X +X         _SincewehavedeterminedthattheprobatecourtcouldconsiderMs._DeLoach_saccountingwithouthavingitreviewedbytheclerk,weneednotdeterminewhethertheclerkactuallyreviewedandreportedontheaccountinginthiscase.Therecorddoesnotpermitustodeterminewhattheprobatecourtclerkdidinthiscase.Ms._DeLoach_Ԁassertsthatsheproducedbankandbrokeragerecordsfortheclerksinspectionandthatthecheckmarksandthedeputyclerkssignatureanddatestampontheaccountingisproofthattheclerkreviewedthefinalaccountingbeforetheprobatecourtapprovedit.Therecord,however,containsnoevidenceconcerningthesignificanceofthecheckmarksorsignature.Thereisnoaffidavitfromtheclerkorotherformalcertificatethattheaccountinghasbeenreviewedandapproved.See3JackRobinson&Jeff_Mobley_,_Pritchard_ԀontheLawofWillsandAdministrationofEstates1156(5thed.1994);2JackRobinsonetal.,TennesseeFormsNo.41312(1991)forstandardformsusedwhenaprobatecourtclerkreviewsandapprovesafinalaccounting.  !#d#++\R3'\       $   X +X         _Theseassetsconsistedof$18,190.69incashanda$30,000certificateofdeposit.  !#d#++\R3'\       $   X +X         _WedonotknowthesourcesofthesereceiptsbecauseMs._DeLoach_Ԁfailedtoprovidethem.TherecordindicatesthatMr.Whitewasreceivingapproximately$3,218permonthinsocialsecuritybenefits($533),veteransbenefits($1,833),companyretirement($477),andrentalincome($375).AssumingthatMr.Whitereceivedthisincomeduringthelasteightmonthsofhislife,Ms._DeLoach_Ԁwouldhavereceived$25,744.TheamountofincomereportedbyMs._DeLoach_Ԁcorrespondsapproximatelywiththisamount. Y !#d#++\R3'\       $   X +X         _Theaccountingliststwo$10,000paymentstoSmithBarneyandOppenheimerFamilyofFunds.Whilethedetailsofthesepurchasesisnotwelldevelopedintherecord,wepresumethatthe$20,000usedtopurchasetheseinvestmentscamefromtheApril1994maturationofMr.Whites$30,000certificateofdeposit.WealsoknowthatMs._DeLoach_ԀmadetheseinvestmentswithoutfirstseekingcourtapprovalasrequiredbyTenn.CodeAnn.3411115(c)(1996). T !#d#++\R3'\       $   X +X         _ThefiguresfortheSmithBarneyandOppenheimerinvestmentsshould___be_Ԁadjustedforcapitalgains,brokercommissions,andotherattendantinvestmentexpenses.SinceMr.Whitesdeathrequiredaprematureliquidationoftheseinvestments,thedeclineintheirnewvalueafterliquidationisnotnecessarilytheresultofimprudentorcarelessinvestmentstrategyonMs._DeLoach_spart.  !#d#++\R3'\       $   X +X         _TheinventoryfiledintheWayneCountyProbateCourtstatesthatthevalueoftheestatesinterestintheSmithBarneyaccountwas$9,512.71.Ms._DeLoach_Ԁrepresentedshereceived$8,849.70fromthisinvestment.Therecordshedsnolightonhowtoreconcilethisdifference.  !#d#++\R3'\       $   X +X         _TherecorddoesnotrevealthesourceofthefundsusedtopurchasethesetwocashierschecksorwhyMs._DeLoach_Ԁturnedovertwocashierschecksinsteadofone.OnepossibleinferenceisthatMs._DeLoach_Ԁcommingledtheconservatorshipfundswithotherfunds.Thesequestionscanandshouldberesolvedonremand.PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'`Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   ion-F Geneva  ion-F Geneva ! . ++#,,d#\R3'\       _       X \RA'\\RA'\7dd7+ԛ @ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE@ MIDDLESECTIONATNASHVILLE+ INRE:     )ERNESTL.WHITE,   )Conservatorship    )      )TYRONEHOWELL,   )Administrator,    )      ) Plaintiff/Appellant,  )      ) DavidsonProbateVS.      ) No.99164      )      ) AppealNo.LORETTA_DeLOACH_,   ) 01A019704PB00154SubstituteConservator,   )      ) Defendant/Appellee.  )@ APPEALFROMTHEPROBATECOURTFORDAVIDSONCOUNTY@ THEHONORABLEFRANKG.CLEMENT,JR.,JUDGEForthePlaintiff/Appellant:    FortheDefendant/Appellee:WilliamS._Hofstetter_     ThomasH.WareNashville,Tennessee     Nashville,TennesseeJamesC._Hofstetter_Nashville,Tennessee@ +VACATEDANDREMANDED +        WILLIAMC.KOCH,JR.,JUDGE +@ OPINION + Thisappealinvolvestheadequacyofaconservatorsaccountingofadisabledpersonsestate.AftertheconservatorfiledherfinalaccountingintheProbateCourtofDavidsonCounty,thepersonalrepresentativeofthedisabledpersonsestateobjectedtotheaccuracyandcompletenessoftheaccounting.Theprobatecourtconductedabenchtrialandapprovedtheconservatorsamendedfinalaccounting.Onthisappeal,thepersonalrepresentativeassertsthatthefinalaccountingwasirregularandthattheconservatorhasfailedtoaccountforallofthedisabledpersonsfunds.Wehavedeterminedthattheconservatorsfinalaccountingcannotbereconciledand,therefore,thattheorderapprovingthefinalaccountingmustbevacated.@ I.  InMay1992,Nashvillespublicguardian -   ׀requestedtheProbateCourtofDavidsonCountytoappointaconservatorforErnestWhite.Mr.White,an80yearoldWorldWarIIveteran,wasresidinginanursinghomeatthetimeandwasunabletomanagehisownaffairsduetoageandphysicalandmentalincapacity.TheprobatecourtappointedaguardianadlitemtoinvestigateMr.Whitescircumstances.UpondiscoveringthatMr.Whiteownedrealpropertyandhadseveralsourcesofretirementincome,theguardianadlitemrecommendedtheappointmentofaconservatorforMr.Whitebecausenoonewaslookingoutforhisproperty.InJuly1992,theprobatecourtappointedthepublicguardianasMr.Whitesconservator. Mr.Whiteswifelaterdiedandhisadopteddaughterwascommittedtoapsychiatricinstitution.ApproximatelyoneyearafterthepublicguardianbecameMr.Whitesconservator,Loretta_DeLoach_,Mr.WhitesniecewholivedinMichigan,askedtheprobatecourttoappointhersubstituteconservator.Ms._DeLoach_ԀintendedtomoveMr.WhitetoanursinghomeinMichiganwheresheandMr.Whitesniecesandnephewscouldmonitorhiscare.Eventhoughaguardianadlitemopposedplacing  Mr.WhiteinMs._DeLoach_scare,theprobatecourtappointedMs._DeLoach_ԀasMr.WhitessubstituteconservatorinOctober1993.Ms._DeLoach_ԀquicklymovedMr.WhitetoanursinghomeinDetroit. Mr.WhitediedonJuly22,1994,leavinghismentallyincapacitateddaughterashisnextofkinandsoleheiratlaw.EventhoughMr.Whiteapparentlyleftawill, .   ׀noonequalifiedaspersonalrepresentativeforhisestate,eitherbecausethewilldidnotnameapersonalrepresentativeorbecausethepersonnamedinthewillwasunabletoserve.Accordingly,TyroneHowell,Mr.Whitesdaughterscoconservator,wasmadethepersonalrepresentativecum_testamento_Ԁ_annexo_ԀofMr.Whitesestate. Ms._DeLoach_Ԁwasnotpromptaboutfilingafinalaccountingandsettlementoftheconservatorshipproperty.OnJune5,1995,Mr.Howellrequestedtheprobatecourttorequirehertofileafinalaccountingandsettlement.AfterMs._DeLoach_ԀfiledafinalaccountingonJuly21,1995,Mr.Howellobjectedtotheaccountingonthegroundthatitwasincompleteandincorrect.OnApril24,1996,theprobatecourtdirectedMs._DeLoach_Ԁtofileafullandcompletefinalaccounting.Ms._DeLoach_ԀfiledanamendedfinalaccountingonMay15,1996,andtheprobatecourtconductedahearingconcerningMr.HowellsobjectionsonJune5,1996.OnJanuary31,1997,theprobatecourtenteredanorderapprovingthefinalaccounting.@ II. @  TheProbateCourtsSubjectMatterJurisdiction  WeturnfirsttoMr.Howellsassertionthattheprobatecourtlackedjurisdictiontoapprovethefinalaccounting.WhileMs._DeLoach_ԀinsiststhatweshouldnotconsiderthisissuebecauseMr.Howelldidnotraiseitintheprobatecourt,issuesconcerningsubjectmatterjurisdictionareofsuchimportancethatwewillconsiderthemevenwhenraisedforthefirsttimeonappeal.SeeTenn.R.App.P.13(b);Manningv._Feidelson_,175Tenn.576,578,136S.W.2d510,51011(1940);Morrowv._Bobbitt_,943S.W.2d384,392(Tenn.Ct.App.1996);Gillespiev.State,619S.W.2d128,129(Tenn.Ct.App.1981).  d  Theconceptofsubjectmatterjurisdictionconcernsaparticularcourtsauthoritytohearaparticulartypeofcase.See_Meighan_Ԁv.U.S.SprintComm.Co.,924S.W.2d632,639(Tenn.1996);Turpinv.ConnerBros.ExcavatingCo.,761S.W.2d296,297(Tenn.1988);StandardSur.&Cas.Co.v.Sloan,180Tenn.220,230,173S.W.2d436,440(1943).ItcanbeconferredonlybytheConstitutionofTennesseeorbylegislativeact,seeKanev.Kane,547S.W.2d559,560(Tenn.1977);Brownv.Brown,198Tenn.600,61819,281S.W.2d492,501(1955),andnotbytheconductoftheparties.SeeShelbyCountyv.CityofMemphis,211Tenn.410,413,365S.W.2d291,292(1963);SeagramDistillersCo.v.Jones,548S.W.2d667,671(Tenn.Ct.App.1976).Whetheracourthassubjectmatterjurisdictiondependsonthenatureofthecauseofactionandthereliefsought.Landersv.Jones,872S.W.2d674,675(Tenn.1994). TheProbateCourtofDavidsonCountywascreatedin1963whenthecityandcountygovernmentsofNashvilleandDavidsonCountywereconsolidatedintothepresentmetropolitangovernment.SeeActofMar.13,1963,ch.124,1963Tenn.Priv.Acts394;FrederickS._LeClercq_,TheTennesseeCourtSystem,8Mem.St._U.L._ԛRev.185,46568(1978).Thecourtsenablinglegislationvesteditwith [_o]riginal_Ԁjurisdictionandpowerswithrespectto...theadministrationofestates,guardianshipsand_conservatorships_and overthepersonandestatesofidiots,lunatics,mentallyillpersonsandpersonsofunsoundmind.ActofMar.13,1963,ch.124,2(1),1963Tenn.Priv.Acts394,395.Italsoreceivedjurisdictionoverallmattersconferredonprobateandcountycourtsbystatelaw.SeeActofMar.13,1963,ch.124,2(1),1963Tenn.Priv.Acts394,396.TheseprovisionsleavelittleroomforseriousdoubtabouttheProbateCourtofDavidsonCountyssubjectmatterjurisdictionoverconservatorshipproceedingsoritspowertoreviewandapprovefinalaccountings. Mr.Howellsjurisdictionalargument,asweunderstandit,isthattheprobatecourtlackedsubjectmatterjurisdictiontoapproveMs._DeLoach_sfinalaccountingbecauseithadnotbeenexaminedandapprovedbytheprobatecourtclerk.Whilethestatutescontemplatethattheclerkwillreportonaccountings, /   theydonotelevatetheclerksroletoanythingmorethanaministerialactivitymuchlikeamasterconsidering  amatteronreference.SeeTenn.R.Civ.P.53.03(3);_Mynatt_Ԁv._Isom_,App.No.03A019702CH00056,1997WL528813,at*1(Tenn.Ct.App.Aug.27,1997)(NoTenn.R.App.P.11applicationfiled).Notwithstandingtheclerkscontemplatedrole,theultimateresponsibilityforadjudgingtherightsandresponsibilitiesofthoseinterestedinanaccountingrestswiththecourt.SeeEvansv.Evans,42Tenn.(2Cold.)143,152(1865);Cobbv._Jameson_,1Tenn.Ch.App.604,607(Tenn.Ch.App.1874).Thus,acourtsdecisiontoconsideranaccountingwithoutfirstreferringittotheclerkdoesnotrequirereversalwhentherecordshowsthatthecourtconsideredtheaccountingonitsmerits._Ԝ 0   כ_Ԁ Mr.HowellreliesheavilyonInre_Cothran_,57Tenn.(10_Heisk_.)119(1872)tosupporthisjurisdictionalargument.Thatcaseinvolvedaproceedinginwhichtheadministratorofadecedentsestateattemptedtoescapeliabilityforthelossofestatefundscausedbyabankfailure.Inadditiontofilinghispetitionprematurelywithoutgivingtherequirednotice,theexecutorfiledthepetitiondirectlywiththecourtwithoutfirstobtainingastatementofaccountfromthecountycourtclerk.TheTennesseeSupremeCourtfoundthat theentireproceedingsisirregular,ifnotvoidabsolutely.Inre_Cothran_,57Tenn.at122.Thecourtalsodeterminedthatthequestionofwhethertheexecutorshouldberelievedofliabilityforthelosscausedbythebankfailurewasoneof delicacyandgreatimportancethatshouldbeaddressedbythechancerycourtratherthanbytheclerkofthecountycourt.Inre_Cothran_,57Tenn.at12324.Accordingly,thecourtdeterminedthattheentireproceedingswere coramnonjudice(notbeforethecourt).Inre_Cothran_,57Tenn.at124. TheInre_Cothran_decisionstandsforthepropositionthatasettlementproceedingincountyorcircuitcourtcannotprovideavehiclefordeterminingwhetheranadministratorhasperformedhisorherdutiesingoodfaith.WedonotreadtheInre_Cothran_decisionasholdingthataprobatecourtsjurisdictionoverthefinalaccountingofaconservatorshipsomehowdependsontheinvolvementorlackofinvolvementofthecourtsownclerk.Thecourtsareultimatelyresponsibleforthedisabledpersonswhocomeundertheircareandprotection.SeeHindsv.Buck,177Tenn.444,448,150S.W.2d1071,1072(1941);InreEllis,822S.W.2d602,607(Tenn.Ct.App.1991).AstheTennesseeSupremeCourtnotedinanothercontext, [_i]f_Ԁ...thetrialJ_udge_ԛseespropertotakeuponhimselftheextralaborofstatingtheaccountandobtainingthenecessarydatatherefor,itisnotamatterforwhichthisC_ourt_ԛwouldreverse,ifthemeritsofthecasehavebeenreached.Grayv.State,95Tenn.317,319,32_S.W._Ԁ201,202(1895).@ III. @  ReconciliationoftheAmendedFinalAccounting  Mr.HowellassertsthattheapprovalofMs._DeLoach_sfinalaccountingdeviatedfromtheapplicableproceduralstatutesinseveralmaterialrespects.Ms._DeLoach_ԀrespondsthatmanyofthespecificissuesMr.Howellraisesonappealwerenotraisedintheprobatecourt.Mr.HowellfiledfourpleadingscontainingobjectionstoMs._DeLoach_saccountingduringtheeighteenmonthsfollowingMr.Whitesdeath.WhateverelsehemayhavemeantwhenheassertedthatMs._DeLoach_saccountingswere incompleteanderroneous,Mr.HowellspecificallyassertedthatMs._DeLoach_ԀhadfailedtoidentifythesourcesofMr.WhitesincomeandthatshehadunderstatedMr.Whitesestatebyshowinginvestmentsasdisbursements. Appellatecourtsgenerallyrecognizethattrialcourtsshouldnotbeplacedinerrorformattersnotbroughttotheirattention.SeeTenn.R.App.P.36(a);Simpsonv.FrontierCommunityCreditUnion,810S.W.2d147,153(Tenn.1991);State_Dept_ԀofHumanServs.v._Defriese_,937S.W.2d954,960(Tenn.Ct.App.1996).However,the_specificity_Ԁrequirementsinthisprincipledonotapplywithequalforcetoappealsfromdecisionsapprovingfinalaccountingsofestatesofdeceasedordisabledpersons.Theappellatecourtsreviewtheseaccountingsdenovoandmayquestionfacially    worrisomeaspectsofanaccounting.SeeStateexrel._Lakins_Ԁv._Mallicoat_,18Tenn.App.285,290,75S.W.2d1031,1034(1934). WeturnfirsttotheassetsandincomethatcameintoMs._DeLoach_shandsduringtheconservatorship.InNovember1993,Ms._DeLoach_spredecessorturnedover$48,190.69inassets. 1   ׀Duringtheconservatorship,Ms._DeLoach_reportedreceivinganadditional$25,284.39,presumablyrepresentingMr.Whitesmonthlyincome._ 2   _ԀThus,thetotalamountoffundsthatcameintoMs._DeLoach_shandsduringtheconservatorshipwas$73,475.08.Thesefigures,exceptforthereportingshortcomings,arerelativelystraightforward. Ms._DeLoach_sdisbursementsareanothermatter.Heramendedfinalaccountingshowsdisbursementstotaling$48,674.50,includingtwo$10,000paymentsforequityinvestmentsofsomesort._ 3   _ԀThesetwodisbursementsdiffermateriallyfromtheotherlisteddisbursements.TheydonotrepresentpaymentsofexpensesincurredonbehalfofMr.White.Rather,theyrepresentachangeintheformofanasset(fromcashtoanequityinvestment).UnlikethedisbursementstopayexpenseswhichreducedthetotalfundsinMr.Whitesestate,thedisbursementstoSmithBarneyandOppenheimershouldhavehadnoneteffectonthetotalfundsintheestate.Whathadpreviouslybeen$20,000incashpresumablybecame$20,000inequityinvestments. AdjustingMs._DeLoach_samendedfinalaccountingtoreflectthepropertreatmentoftheSmithBarneyandOppenheimerinvestments,herendingbalanceshouldhavebeenapproximately$44,800ratherthan$24,800.Accordinglythe___final_Ԁaccountingshouldhavelookedsomethinglikethis:  BeginningCash0 0 0 0 $18,190.69  CashfrommaturedCD0 0 0 10,000.00  SmithBarney&Oppenheimer0 0 20,000.00_ 4   _  Receipts0 0 0 0 0 25,284.39  Totalfundsofconservatorship0 0 $73,475.08  Disbursementsforrealexpenses0 (28,674.50)  EndingBalance0 0 0 0 $44,800.58BasedonthefiguressubmittedbyMs._DeLoach_,theendingbalanceintheconservatorshipshouldhaveconsistedoftheliquidatedvalueoftheSmithBarneyandOppenheimerinvestmentsplusover$20,000incash. RatherthansupportingMs._DeLoach_saccounting,thebeginninginventoryofMr.WhitesestatefiledintheWayneCounty,MichiganProbateCourtcorroboratestheconclusionthatMs._DeLoach_ԀhasnotproperlyaccountedforthecashassetsinMr.Whitesestate.Accordingtothatinventory,Ms._DeLoach_turnedover$24,833.48asthetotalbalanceofconservatorshipfundsrepresentingtheproceedsoftheOppenheimerinvestment($9,665.12),theproceedsoftheSmithBarneyinvestment($8,849.70), 5   ׀andtwocashierschecks(onefor$4,816.01andanotherfor$1,502.65)._ 6   _ԀWhiletheamountscorrespondingtotheinvestmentsappeartobewithintherangeofreason,theamountturnedoverascashdoesnot.UsingMs._DeLoach_sownaccountingfigures,wehavedeterminedthatthecashintheconservatorshipestateshouldhavelookedsomethinglikethis:  Beginningcash0 0 0 0 $18,190.69  Receipts0 0 0 0 0 25,284.39  CashfrommaturedCD0 0 0 10,000.00  Totalconservatorshipcash0 0 $53,475.08  Disbursementsforrealexpenses0 (28,674.50)  Endingcashonhand0 0 0 $24,800.58Ms._DeLoach_Ԁturnedoveronly$6,318.66overandabovetheproceedsfromtheSmithBarneyandOppenheimerinvestments.Therecordprovidesuswithnomeanstoreconcilethedifferenceofover$18,000betweenthisamountandtheamountofcashthatshouldhavebeenonhandwhentheconservatorshipwasclosed. Atleasttwoothermattersrelatingtothisaccountingrequireadditionalexplanation.Thefirstrelatestoa$3,411.55feetoMs._DeLoach_scounselapprovedbytheprobatecourtonDecember9,1993.Thesecondinvolvesa$4,983.67reimbursementtoMs._DeLoach_ԀfortheexpensesofmovingMr.WhitetoDetroitthatwasapprovedbytheprobatecourtatthesametimeitapprovedthelegalfee.Thefinalaccountinglistsnodisbursementsfortheseexpenses,yetitwouldbehighlyunusualifthesecourtapprovedexpenditureswerenotmade.Iftheseexpenseswerepaidfromconservatorshipfundsbutjustnotreported,includingtheminMs._DeLoach_sfinalaccountingrendersherfigurescompletelyirreconcilable. Whenapartyhavinganinterestinadisabledpersonsestatechallengesaconservatorsfinalaccounting,theburdenisontheconservatortoestablishthecorrectnessoftheaccounting.SeeConservatorshipofSheardv.Franks_,652P.2d849,851(Or.Ct.App.1982);Inre_Rasco_,552S.W.2d557,560(Tex.Civ.App.1977);Salisburyv.HanoverIns.Co.,443P.2d135,137(Wyo.1968).ConsistentwiththecourtsdutyunderTenn.CodeAnn.3413107(4)(1996) toproperlycareforthe...propertyofthedisabledperson,thecourthavingjurisdictionoveraconservatorshipshouldapproveaconservatorsfinalaccountingonlywhenitfullyandaccuratelyaccountsforthedisabledpersonsestate.TherecordconcerningMs._DeLoach_saccountingforheruseofMr.Whitesfundsleavesopentoomanyquestionsforheraccountingtobeapproved.Accordingly,wevacatetheorderaffirmingtheamendedfinalaccountingandremandthecasetotheprobatecourtforconsiderationinstrictcompliancewiththeapplicablestatutes.@ IV.  WevacatetheprobatecourtsJanuary31,1997orderapprovingMs._DeLoach_samendedfinalsettlementandremandthecaseforfurtherproceedingsconsistentwiththisopinion.Inlightofourdispositionofthecase,weneednotaddressMr.Howellsotherissuesbecausehewillbeabletopresentthemtotheprobatecourtonremand.ThecostsofthisappealaretaxedtoLoretta_DeLoach_personally.TheyarenottobepaidfromthefundsinMr.Whitesestate.Ms._DeLoach_Ԁmayrequesttheprobatecourttoawardedherreimbursementfromtheestateforthesecosts,andtheprobatecourtmaygrantreimbursementifitdeterminesthattheMs._DeLoach_ԀisnotresponsiblefortheshortcomingsinheramendedfinalaccountingandifthecourtdeterminesthatMs._DeLoach_ԀhasfullyandappropriatelyaccountedforallofMr.Whitesfundsthatcameintoherpossessionwhileshewasservingashisconservator.       _____________________________       WILLIAMC.KOCH,JR.,JUDGECONCUR:____________________________________HENRYF.TODD,_P.J._,M.S.____________________________________WILLIAMH._INMAN_,SPECIALJUDGE