Skip to content

B.C. lawyer ordered to return $71K executor fee after misconduct finding

A Law Society of BC hearing panel determined Vernon-based lawyer Leonard Marriott committed professional misconduct by improperly handling a will and pre-paying himself a 'substantial' executor fee.
lawsocietyofbritishcolumbiacrest
The Law Society of British Columbia crest.

A Law Society of BC panel has determined Vernon-based lawyer Leonard Marriott committed professional misconduct for mishandling the execution of a will and improperly withdrawing funds as an executor.

Marriott “failed to meet the quality of service of a competent wills and estates lawyer” as he “did not appear to know the general principles and procedures in his practice area” resulting in delays in distributing the estate.

Furthermore, Marriott’s “pre-taking” of more than $71,000 in executor fees without signed releases from the beneficiary constituted further professional misconduct, the panel ruled, adding that the fee amounted to five per cent of the $1.2-million estate and considered a “substantive amount.”

The panel ordered Marriott to return the $71,149.12 in executor fees to his trust account by Dec. 31, 2024, and not withdraw the funds until he obtains the consent of the beneficiary or a court order.

While Marriott testified that he spent many hours administering the estate, he did not provide documentary evidence that this was the case, the panel wrote in its decision recently published online.

Furthermore, after facing a complaint to the society, Marriott withdrew $7,560 in legal fees to respond to the society. This, said the panel, also constituted professional misconduct.

The panel dismissed the society’s allegation that Marriott misappropriated or improperly withdrew another $26,760.21 in legal fees.

Marriott operates his own firm, North Valley Law.

Last June, Marriott faced a second hearing for allegations of professional misconduct, also involving estate planning. That citation involves allegations Marriott was untimely and communicated poorly with a client, in addition to filing “materials with the Supreme Court of British Columbia that you knew or ought to have known contained false or misleading information.”

Those allegations remain unproven.

[email protected]