In Re Guardianship Of Medvedev, Andrei Medvedev, Appellant

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
IN RE GUARDIANSHIP OF VALENTIN
K. MEDVEDEV, an incapacitated
person,
ANDREI MEDVEDEV and MARIA
MEDVEDEVA,
Appellants,
v.
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON,
MEDICAL CENTER, GROUP HEALTH,
VIRGINA MASION MEDICAL CENTER,
PARTNERS IN CARE,
Respondents.
No. 60522-4-1
DIVISION ONE
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
r-o
72*
PC
ro
o
CO
c;
—'o
FILED: April 22. 2013
Spearman, A.C.J. —Andrei Medvedev and Maria Medvedeva appeal various
provisions contained in the order appointing Maria Medvedeva as successor guardian
for her late husband, Valentin Medvedev. Holding the issues raised by the appellants
are either moot or without merit, we affirm.
FACTS
Valentin Medvedev suffered a stroke. In 2006, the trial court found Medvedev
incapacitated and appointed Partners in Care as the full guardian of his person and
estate. Valentin's children (Andrei and Anna) and his wife (Maria) repeatedly attempted

No. 68379-1/2
to prevent Partners in Care from fulfilling its duties. They harassed Partners in Care, as
well as Valentin's healthcare providers, to the point where Swedish Hospital 	issued
trespass admonishments to Andrei and Maria for disruptive behavior. In April 2007, the
trial court issued 	an 	order of protection 	preventing Andrei, 	Maria, and 	Anna 	from
harassing 	Partners 	in Care 	and Valentin's 	healthcare 	providers. 	Partners 	in Care,
nevertheless, petitioned to withdraw as guardian.
On July 30, 2007, a King County Superior Court commissioner signed an order
appointing 	Maria as 	the 	successor guardian 	of Valentin. The 	order 	included the
restrictions previously imposed upon Andrei, Maria, and Anna in the protective order.
The order also approved (1) $40,407.80 in fees and costs for the guardian ad litem; (2)
$12,293 in attorney fees and costs for the person who had served as counsel for
Valentin; and (3) $62,174.02 in fees and costs for Partners in Care and its attorneys.
Andrei and Maria appeal this order.
DISCUSSION
Appellants argue the trial court improperly restrained them from contacting the
health care workers providing Valentin with his care. However, given it is undisputed
that Valentin has since passed away, the restrictions set forth in the order appointing a
successor guardian 	are 	no 	longer in 	place, 	and 	that 	issue 	is 	moot. 	See 	RCW
11.88.140(c) (guardianship terminates automatically at the death of the incapacitated
person).

No. 68379-1/3
The 	appellants 	also 	contend 	the 	trial 	court 	exceeded 	its 	authority when 	it
awarded 	guardianship 	fees 	and 	costs. 	They 	cite 	WAC 	388-79-030, 	which 	limits
guardianship fees to no more than $175 per month and administrative costs to no more
than $700 for Department of Social and Health Services (Department) clients. 	But
appellants cite to no evidence in the record establishing that Valentin was a client of the
Department at the time the fees and costs awarded by the court were incurred. Nor
have they made an attempt to show that the awarded fees and costs fall under the
purview of the cited WAC. Indeed, from our review of the documents designated by the
appellants, it is clear that for at least some portion of the guardianship, Valentin was not
a client of the Department. In short, appellants fail to meet their burden of establishing
that the trial court's award of fees and costs was error.
Affirmed.
WE CONCUR:
Js^/7V\^ H.UVj.