John Drummond hereinafter, “the administrator”, the administrator of the estate of his mother, Daisy Hudson, filed a petition in the Probate Court of Cobb County for a settling of account by his sister, Lynda Drummond hereinafter, “the conservator”, for the funds she handled in her capacity as conservator for Hudson while she was incapacitated. After a hearing, the probate court entered judgment against the conservator in the amount of $38,428.27. The conservator appeals, contending the probate court erred in considering an offer of settlement and in relying upon documents that were not admitted into evidence. Further, the conservator contends that the probate court’s final settlement is not supported by the evidence adduced at the hearing and that the probate court erred in granting relief in favor of Hudson’s estate on a claim for breach of fiduciary duty asserted by the administrator. For the reasons explained below, we affirm in part and reverse in part. Because the trial court sits as the trier of fact when settling a conservator’s accounts,1 its findings based upon conflicting evidence are analogous to a jury verdict and should not be disturbed by a reviewing court if there is any evidence to support them. When the evidence is uncontroverted and no question of witness credibility is presented, however, the trial court’s application of the law to undisputed facts is subject to de novo appellate review. Citations omitted. Stoker v. Severin , 292 Ga. App. 870, 871 665 SE2d 913 2008.
In this case, it is undisputed that on November 9, 2004, the probate court issued the conservator letters of guardianship of Hudson’s person and property2; Hudson was then 80 years old and suffering from early Alzheimer’s Disease. In connection with her appointment, the conservator posted the required bond for the faithful discharge of her duties3 in the amount of $20,000. The probate court increased the required bond to $165,000, in connection with the sale of Hudson’s residence in August 2006. Hudson died intestate on November 9, 2006, leaving three heirs: the conservator, the administrator, and their sister. Following Hudson’s death, the probate court entered an order, based on the consent of all three of Hudson’s heirs, declaring that no administration of the estate was necessary. Relying on this order, the conservator distributed Hudson’s remaining estate of $130,437 equally among the heirs, with each receiving $43,479. The probate court later entered a consent order vacating the “no administration necessary” order and appointed the administrator to administer Hudson’s estate. The administrator then filed the instant petition for a final settlement of the conservator’s accounts.
