A new California appellate decision just changed the game for trustees in LA, Orange, San Bernardino, and Riverside Counties who get hit with personal legal costs in a beneficiary lawsuit. Serving as a trustee? Fighting a trust dispute in West Covina, Los Angeles, Anaheim, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ontario, or Pomona? This ruling could be shaping your case right now. Let’s break down what changed, what it means for you, and what to do next.
Background: What McKinley v. Harris Means
On October 13, 2026, the California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division Three, published McKinley v. Harris (modified October 14, 2026). Here’s the question at the heart of it: can a probate court lean on its general equitable authority — that broad, fairness-based power courts have even without a specific statute — to make a beneficiary’s inheritance pay for a trustee’s personal attorney fees? Our team sees this issue come up constantly in trust litigation.
The Court of Appeal’s answer? No. A probate court can’t just use open-ended equitable power to award attorney fees to a trustee sued in her individual capacity — meaning sued personally, not just in her role running the trust. The trustee needs something concrete: a specific Probate Code provision, or clear language in the trust document or a contract, that actually allows fee recovery. No statute, no contract clause, no fee award. Fairness alone doesn’t cut it anymore.
This holding is significant because many trustees in Southern California have historically assumed that a probate court could, in its discretion, order fee-shifting whenever a trustee successfully defended against a beneficiary’s claims. McKinley v. Harris narrows that assumption. For background on the probate court’s general role in trust administration, see the California Courts Self-Help Center at courts.ca.gov/selfhelp-probate, and for the statutory framework governing trustee compensation and fees, see the California Probate Code at leginfo.legislature.ca.gov.
How This Affects Trustees and Beneficiaries in LA and OC Trust Litigation
This ruling affects two main groups of people involved in trust disputes across Los Angeles County, Orange County, and the Inland Empire.
Trustees. If you are a trustee facing a lawsuit from a beneficiary — for example, a claim that you breached your fiduciary duty, mismanaged trust assets, or favored one beneficiary over another — you can no longer assume that winning the case automatically means the trust (or the losing beneficiary’s share) will pay your personal legal bills. You will need to identify a specific statute, such as Probate Code section 15684 or 17211, or language in the trust instrument itself, that supports fee recovery. If no such basis exists, you may need to pay your own defense costs out of pocket, even if you successfully defend the claim.
Beneficiaries. If you are a beneficiary who believes a trustee acted improperly, this decision may reduce the financial risk of bringing a legitimate claim. Beneficiaries in cities like Anaheim, Ontario, and Riverside who were previously concerned that a losing trustee lawsuit could still result in their inheritance being reduced to cover the trustee’s personal fees now have a stronger argument that such fee awards require a specific legal basis, not just the judge’s general sense of fairness.
Both sides should understand that trust litigation in California probate courts remains fact-specific. Outcomes depend on the trust document’s exact language, the type of claims raised, and whether any statute directly applies. For a broader look at how trust and estate matters are handled, see TEZ Law Firm’s estate planning and trust services page.
What You Should Do Now
If you are involved in an active or potential trust dispute in Southern California, consider these steps:
- Review the trust document carefully. Look for any clause that addresses attorney fee reimbursement for the trustee, including indemnification language.
- Identify applicable statutes. Trustees should work with legal counsel to determine whether a Probate Code section applies to their specific dispute before assuming fees will be recoverable from the trust.
- Separate individual-capacity claims from trustee-capacity claims. Since the ruling focuses on claims against a trustee personally, understanding how your case is framed matters for fee recovery.
- Keep detailed billing records. Whether you are a trustee seeking reimbursement or a beneficiary challenging a fee request, clear documentation supports your position.
- Act before trial, not after. Fee-shifting arguments are generally stronger when raised early, since courts may expect parties to establish the legal basis for fees as the case proceeds, not only after judgment.
- Consult with an attorney familiar with California probate and trust litigation before making major decisions about trust assets or litigation strategy.
How TEZ Law Firm Can Help
TEZ Law Firm provides services for trustees and beneficiaries involved in California trust disputes, including reviewing trust documents, evaluating fee-recovery options under the Probate Code, and representing clients in probate court litigation. The firm also assists with related business and estate matters, such as disputes that overlap with trust administration, through its business litigation practice. Attorneys at TEZ Law Firm can review the facts of your situation and explain the options available under current California law.
Frequently Asked Questions
What exactly did the court decide in McKinley v. Harris?
The California Court of Appeal held that probate courts do not have general equitable power to award a trustee’s personal attorney fees against a beneficiary’s share when the trustee is sued in her individual capacity. The trustee must instead point to a specific statute or contract provision allowing fee recovery.
Can a trustee still get attorney fees paid from the trust after this ruling?
Yes, in some situations. A trustee may still recover fees if a specific Probate Code provision or the trust document itself authorizes it. What changed is that a probate court can no longer award fees based only on general fairness principles without that specific legal basis.
Does this ruling apply to all trust disputes in California?
The decision applies statewide as published appellate authority, but it specifically addresses claims against a trustee in an individual capacity. How it applies to your case can depend on the type of claims involved and the language of the trust, so case-specific legal review is important.
What should a beneficiary do if a trustee requests fees from the trust?
A beneficiary can ask the trustee, or the court, to identify the specific statute or contract provision that supports the fee request. If no clear legal basis exists, the beneficiary may have grounds to object under the reasoning in McKinley v. Harris.
Where can I read more about California probate procedures?
The California Courts Self-Help Center at courts.ca.gov/selfhelp-probate provides general information on probate court procedures, and the California Probate Code is available at leginfo.legislature.ca.gov. These sources are current as of October 29, 2026.
Trust disputes involving fee recovery can be complex, especially after a significant appellate decision like McKinley v. Harris. If you are a trustee or beneficiary dealing with a trust dispute in West Covina, Los Angeles, Orange County, San Bernardino, or Riverside, you can schedule a consultation with TEZ Law Firm to discuss your situation and understand your options under current California law. Managing attorney JJ Zhang (California Bar #326666) and the TEZ Law Firm team welcome your call to the firm’s offices in West Covina, City of Industry, or Newport Beach. Visit the contact page to schedule a consultation today.
This article is general information, not legal advice, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Laws and agency practices change; contact TEZ Law Firm (West Covina, California) at 626-888-6856 or [email protected] about your situation. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.