NAITO v. NAITO

8705-91003; CA A49882.

783 P.2d 1012 (1989)

In the matter of the Guardian/Conservatorship of Hide NAITO, an Incapacitated Person. Midori Naito, Appellant-Cross-Respondent, v. Samuel T. NAITO, William S. Naito, Respondents-Cross-Appellants, and Herbert M. Schwab, Respondent.

Court of Appeals of Oregon.

Decided December 13, 1989.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Hollis McMilan, Portland, argued the cause for appellant-cross-respondent. With him on the briefs, were G. Kenneth Shiroishi, Marsha Murray-Lusby and Dunn, Carney, Allen, Higgins & Tongue and David B. Markowitz, Lisa A. Kaner and Markowitz, Herbold, Stafford & Glade, P.C., Portland.

Colleen O'Shea Clarke, Portland, argued the cause for respondent and respondents-cross-appellants. With her on the briefs, was Weiss, DesCamp & Botteri, Portland.

Before RICHARDSON, P.J., and ROSSMAN and EDMONDS, JJ.


ROSSMAN, Judge.

In 1987, Midori Naito (wife) was appointed conservator of the estate of Hide Naito, her husband. Hide's sons from a prior marriage, Samuel and William Naito (sons), opposed wife's appointment and, in January, 1988, filed a petition seeking her removal. They alleged that she had engaged in acts of self dealing whereby she had removed substantial assets from the estate. They also requested attorney fees payable from the estate.

The trial court...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases