Contrary to petitioners' assertions, a court is not required to start with the firms' fee requests and make specific deductions therefrom (see, Matter of Guattery, 278 A.D.2d 738, 739), which method would, in this instance, place undue emphasis on the number of hours billed and rates charged to the exclusion of the other Potts factors (see, Matter of Mergentime, 207 A.D.2d 453). Moreover, we reject Farrell Fritz, P.C.'s contentions that the Surrogate lacked authority to review its fees and denied it the opportunity to be heard (see, Robison v. von Langendorff, 221 A.D.2d 189, 190).