
    Submitted on record and briefs September 25, 1989,
    affirmed April 4, 1990
    MASTERS et al, Respondents, v. BISSETT et al, Appellant. In the Matter of the December 29, 1977 Rose Bissett Hefty Trust, In the Matter of the Rudolph A. Bissett Testamentary Residue Trust, In the Matter of the November 10, 1969 Rudolph A. Bissett and Rose E. Bissett Trust, MASTERS et al, Respondents, v. BISSETT et al, Appellant.
    
    ([ AXXXX-XXXXX ])
    ([ AXXXX-XXXXX ]; CA A50520)
    790 P2d 32
    Larry Bissett, Portland, filed the briefs pro se for appellant.
    Michael J. Morris and Bennett, Hartman, Tauman & Reynolds, P.C., Portland filed the brief for respondents.
    Before Buttler, Presiding Judge, and Warren and Rossman, Judges.
   PER CURIAM

Trustee appeals a judgment denying his motion to surcharge the distributive shares of plaintiffs for all of the litigation expenses that he incurred in defending his administration of a testamentary trust of which he and plaintiffs are beneficiaries. This appeal is the fifth one arising out of proceedings that are described in Masters v. Bissett (A41367)(A44881), 101 Or App 163, 790 P2d 16 (1990). Considering all of the issues involved in all of the litigation, including the five appeals, we cannot say, as trustee would have us do, that one side has been any more unreasonable than the other. Equity dictates that each beneficiary bear the cost of this litigation in proportion to the individual’s interest in the trust assets.

Affirmed.  