Background
After Danny Lee Burnett Sr. died, Cassandra Wiltz produced his will and was appointed executor of his estate. Attorney Nickolas McCoy represented Wiltz as fiduciary under an hourly fee agreement. After Wiltz asked McCoy to cease representing her and the estate, McCoy sought permission to withdraw and requested $7,997.84 for legal services and expenses.
Following an April 2024 hearing, a magistrate granted both requests. Wiltz objected, disputing the fee agreement, the services performed, McCoy’s handling of the estate file and cremation records, and the fairness of the proceedings. Although the probate court directed her to submit a transcript and informed her that an audio recording was available on a USB drive for $4, she did not provide a transcript, an affidavit of the evidence, or another acceptable record. The probate court therefore accepted the magistrate’s factual findings, overruled her objections, and adopted the magistrate’s decisions.
The Court’s Holding
The Fifth District affirmed. Under Ohio Civil Rule 53(D)(3)(b)(iii), an objection to a magistrate’s factual finding must be supported by a transcript of the relevant evidence or, if a transcript is unavailable, an affidavit of that evidence. Because Wiltz supplied neither, the probate court was required to accept the magistrate’s factual findings and review only the legal conclusions based on those facts.
The appellate court’s review was correspondingly limited to whether the probate court abused its discretion in applying the law to the established findings. It found no abuse of discretion and concluded that the magistrate’s legal conclusions were supported by those findings. The court overruled Wiltz’s first five assignments of error to the extent considered.
The court also declined to consider the portion of Wiltz’s fifth assignment of error appearing after page 30 or any part of her sixth assignment because her brief exceeded the applicable 30-page limit without prior leave. Its review was limited to claimed errors in the probate court’s July 30, 2025 judgment approving attorney fees.
Key Takeaways
- A party challenging a magistrate’s factual findings must provide the trial court with the relevant transcript or, when a transcript is unavailable, a proper affidavit of the evidence.
- Without an acceptable evidentiary record, the magistrate’s factual findings are treated as established, and appellate review is limited to the trial court’s application of law to those findings.
- An appellate court may disregard arguments that exceed applicable brief-length limits when the party did not obtain leave to file an oversized brief.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that objections to a magistrate’s findings cannot preserve factual disputes without the record required by Civil Rule 53. Even extensive allegations about billing, services, bias, or misconduct will not permit factual review when the objecting party fails to submit a transcript or authorized substitute.
It also highlights the practical consequences of violating appellate briefing limits: arguments falling outside the permitted length may receive no consideration at all.