In re Thomas

Vermont Superior Court, Civil Division, Washington Unit · 2025 · Family Law

Family LawGuardianshipProbate JurisdictionFinal AccountingStandingguardianfinal accountingprobate division

Facts

Paul Thomas was appointed Miriam Thomas's financial guardian in 2010. In 2018, after Bruce and Elizabeth Thomas sought his removal, the probate division found deficiencies in Paul's performance, ordered him replaced, required a final accounting and records, and stated it would later determine any liability arising from those deficiencies. After Miriam died in 2019, the Estate was substituted, and in 2020 the probate division held evidentiary hearings concerning Paul's management of estate assets. The probate division ultimately concluded that more than $1 million in expenditures or uses of assets were not allowable and entered a consolidated final judgment requiring repayment and fees.

Issue

Whether the probate division had authority to determine losses and order repayment in connection with a former guardian's final accounting after the guardian had been removed and the ward had died, and whether the Estate had standing and Paul had adequate notice in that proceeding.

Rule

When a guardian has not yet been discharged, the probate division retains authority to require and settle the guardian's final accounting, determine whether expenditures and uses of the ward's assets were allowable, and order restitutionary repayment of losses or unauthorized amounts as part of that accounting process. Under 14 V.S.A. § 917 and the statutes governing guardians' accounts, this authority is ancillary and incidental to the probate division's supervisory and accounting functions, even though it does not extend to adjudicating separate tort damages claims.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In Burlington, Vermont, Nina Lopez served for years as financial guardian for her uncle, Omar Reed. After the probate division removed Nina for poor recordkeeping, it ordered her to submit a final accounting, but never entered an order discharging her; Omar died six months later, and his estate administrator asked the probate division to disallow undocumented withdrawals and require Nina to repay those amounts.

May the probate division determine the losses and order repayment in that proceeding?

Explanation. The majority treated this type of proceeding as part of the guardian’s final accounting and settlement of accounts, not as a separate tort case. Because the guardian had been removed but not formally discharged, the duty to render and settle a final accounting continued even after the ward’s death, and the probate division could determine what expenditures were allowable and require restitution of losses or unauthorized amounts.