Family disputes over estates often involve multiple fronts of litigation. A will contest might accompany challenges to beneficiary designations. Claims of undue influence might target both probate and non-probate assets. When the dust settles and the jury delivers a mixed verdict, upholding the will but invalidating an IRA designation, who pays the legal bills?
This situation is common in probate cases and it creates a significant question for probate litigants: Can you recover attorney’s fees when you win on some claims but lose on others? More specifically, does partial success in challenging non-probate transfers entitle you to fees even when your will contest fails?
The case of In re Estate of Suzanne Ryther, No. 01-23-00600-CV (Tex. App.–Houston [1st Dist.] Aug. 12, 2025), provides an opportunity to examine how Texas courts apply equitable principles when determining attorneys’ fees in multi-claim probate litigation.
Facts & Procedural History
When Suzanne died in December 2020 at age 88, she left a Will that disinherited, William, one of her three biological sons. Eric filed an application to probate his mother’s 2017, Will, which left her entire estate to Eric, his brother Jeffrey, and two stepchildren. The Will explicitly stated that it made “no provisions” for William.
William contested the Will, claiming his mother lacked testamentary capacity and had been unduly influenced by Eric and Jeffrey. He challenged both the will and beneficiary designations on non-probate assets, including an IRA worth over $400,000.
William’s second amended petition sought ten separate declarations and requested attorney’s fees under both the Texas Estates Code and the Texas Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act (the “DJA”).
The jury delivered a split verdict in October 2022. The jury found that the decedent had testamentary capacity and was not unduly influenced regarding the Will. However, the jury also found that the decedent lacked contractual capacity to sign the IRA beneficiary designation and that Eric had unduly influenced her regarding that designation.
Following the verdict, William’s attorney requested $179,311.12 in attorney’s fees under the DJA. The trial court denied William any fee recovery. William appealed.
Attorney’s Fees Under the Texas Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act
Texas follows the American Rule, which provides that parties generally bear their own attorney’s fees unless a statute or contract authorizes recovery. The DJA is one of the statutes that provides for an award of attorney’s fees in declaratory judgment actions and the Texas Estates Code provides for an award for will contests.
The DJA says that a court “may award costs and reasonable and necessary attorney’s fees as are equitable and just.” The permissive language grants trial courts broad discretion in determining whether to award fees at all. By using the word “may” rather than “shall,” the statute means that prevailing on a declaratory judgment claim does not automatically entitle a party to recover attorney’s fees. The trial court has to consider the totality of circumstances and exercise judgment about what outcome serves equity and justice. Factors may include the degree of success obtained, what purpose the litigation served, and whether awarding fees would serve the underlying purposes of the statute.
The Texas Estates Code provides a separate basis for recovering attorney’s fees in probate litigation. Section 352.052 says that those who bring will contests can recover attorneys fees for defending or prosecuting the Will. It even says that the award can be made if the claim fails, if brought in good faith.
Can the DJA Provide Fees When the Estates Code Does Not?
William did not challenge the probate court’s determination that he could not recover attorney’s fees under the Texas Estates Code. The jury found that the will was valid and that the decedent had not been unduly influenced regarding its execution.
Similarly, the probate court found that William could not recover fees related to his requested declaration seeking a constructive trust. Constructive trusts are equitable remedies imposed to prevent unjust enrichment, and no statute authorizes attorney’s fees for claims seeking this remedy. William did not challenge these determinations on appeal.
The probate court’s analysis focused on whether William could use the DJA to obtain attorney’s fees related to claims that would not support fee recovery under the Texas Estates Code. Six and a half of his requested declarations directly challenged the Will’s validity based on lack of capacity and undue influence. One declaration sought the imposition of a constructive trust. The remaining declarations targeted the validity of non-probate designations and transfers.
The probate court had determined that William could not recover fees under the DJA for the declarations that challenged the Will’s validity. Because he had not succeeded on his Will contest and was not entitled to fees for that litigation, allowing recovery through the DJA would circumvent the specific statutory scheme governing will contests.
William only challenged the determination for attorney’s fees based on the IRA designation change. The appellate court affirmed the probate court. It essentially concluded that probate courts do not need to engage in mathematical calculations of partial success to justify fee denials. The DJA grants discretion to evaluate the totality of circumstances and reach an equitable result. Absent a clear showing that the trial court acted arbitrarily or unreasonably, the appellate court did not change the probate court’s determination.
The Takeaway
This approach reflects an important principle in fee litigation. Partial success does not automatically entitle a party to full fee recovery. When a party pursues multiple claims and achieves only limited success, the probate court may consider whether awarding fees for the entire litigation would be equitable and just. While one might think that requiring the losing party to pay fees for claims on which they prevailed would be inherently inequitable, it may or may not be possible. The rules leave this to the court to decide. These concepts have sigificant implications for litigants considering comprehensive challenges to estate plans. Bringing numerous claims under declaratory judgment theories might not automatically create fee-shifting opportunities, and partial victories may not support fee recovery when viewed against the backdrop of the entire litigation.
Do you need help with a probate matter in Austin or the surrounding area? We are Austin probate attorneys. We help clients navigate the probate process. Call today for a free confidential consultation, 512-273-7444.
Our Austin Probate Attorneys provide a full range of probate services to our clients, including helping with probate disputes involving will contests and IRA designation changes. Affordable rates, fixed fees, and payment plans are available. We provide step-by-step instructions, guidance, checklists, and more for completing the probate process. We have years of combined experience that we can use to support and guide you with probate and estate matters. Call us today for a FREE attorney consultation.
Disclaimer
The content of this website is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice. The information presented may not apply to your situation and should not be acted upon without consulting a qualified probate attorney. We encourage you to seek the advice of a competent attorney with any legal questions you may have.
