Legal News: Trusts and Estates
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
Suleman v. Superior Court (Petersen) (January 8, 2010)
A non-relative petitioning for appointment of a guardian for a
minor’s estate must establish standing under Probate Code
Sec. 1510(a) by pleading ultimate facts demonstrating financial
misconduct or alleging other information sufficient to warrant
court intervention in the management of minor’s money or other
property. Test for determining whether a nonrelative has
standing to file a petition for appointment of a guardian is the
same as test for determining whether petition’s allegations are
sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss. Probate court erred by
ordering an investigation without providing mother with notice or
an opportunity to be heard before issuing its order.
A non-relative petitioning for appointment of a guardian for a
minor’s estate must establish standing under Probate Code
Sec. 1510(a) by pleading ultimate facts demonstrating financial
misconduct or alleging other information sufficient to warrant
court intervention in the management of minor’s money or other
property. Test for determining whether a nonrelative has
standing to file a petition for appointment of a guardian is the
same as test for determining whether petition’s allegations are
sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss. Probate court erred by
ordering an investigation without providing mother with notice or
an opportunity to be heard before issuing its order.
Estate of Tolman (February 11, 2010)
Statement in testator's will expressing her desire not to provide
for any unmentioned heirs and limiting recover to $1 for any
unmentioned person who successfully claimed to be an heir did
not manifest an intention to preclude predeceased residual
beneficiary's issue from inheriting under Probate Code Sec.
21110(a)'s anti-lapse provision.
Statement in testator's will expressing her desire not to provide
for any unmentioned heirs and limiting recover to $1 for any
unmentioned person who successfully claimed to be an heir did
not manifest an intention to preclude predeceased residual
beneficiary's issue from inheriting under Probate Code Sec.
21110(a)'s anti-lapse provision.
Leader v. Cords (March 23, 2010)
An appeal lies from an order refusing to authorize or allow
"payment of compensation or expenses of an attorney."
Because a trustee's duty to account was inseparable from his
duty to carry out the terms of trust by distributing remaining
trust assets, a "contest of the trustee's account" as used in
Probate Code Sec. 17211(b), included beneficiaries' petition for
distribution.
An appeal lies from an order refusing to authorize or allow
"payment of compensation or expenses of an attorney."
Because a trustee's duty to account was inseparable from his
duty to carry out the terms of trust by distributing remaining
trust assets, a "contest of the trustee's account" as used in
Probate Code Sec. 17211(b), included beneficiaries' petition for
distribution.
Estate of Winans (March 25, 2010)
Proper counseling about the nature and consequences of a
bequest to a disqualified person requires an independent
attorney to ensure that testator understands the nature of the
property bequeathed, that a disqualified person will receive
property, and that the "natural objects" of testator’s bounty, if
any, will not receive property. Testator does not need to know
about the existence of Probate Code Sec. 21351 or understand
its workings to understand the nature of a bequest. Although
Sec. 21351(b) does not specifically require it, statute requires
the counseling to occur under circumstances that would
insulate transferor from any improper influences giving rise to a
donative transfer and encourage transferor to speak frankly
with certifying attorney about those influences, if any. At a
minimum, any disqualified person and any person associated
with a disqualified person must be absent, and burden is on a
disqualified person to demonstrate counseling session’s
confidentiality by showing that presence of additional persons
either was necessary to accomplish the counseling session or
did not interfere with transferor’s full and honest disclosure to
the independent attorney. An attorney is "independent" for
purposes of Sec. 21351 if that attorney’s personal
circumstances do not prevent him or her from forming a
disinterested judgment about the validity of a bequest.
Proper counseling about the nature and consequences of a
bequest to a disqualified person requires an independent
attorney to ensure that testator understands the nature of the
property bequeathed, that a disqualified person will receive
property, and that the "natural objects" of testator’s bounty, if
any, will not receive property. Testator does not need to know
about the existence of Probate Code Sec. 21351 or understand
its workings to understand the nature of a bequest. Although
Sec. 21351(b) does not specifically require it, statute requires
the counseling to occur under circumstances that would
insulate transferor from any improper influences giving rise to a
donative transfer and encourage transferor to speak frankly
with certifying attorney about those influences, if any. At a
minimum, any disqualified person and any person associated
with a disqualified person must be absent, and burden is on a
disqualified person to demonstrate counseling session’s
confidentiality by showing that presence of additional persons
either was necessary to accomplish the counseling session or
did not interfere with transferor’s full and honest disclosure to
the independent attorney. An attorney is "independent" for
purposes of Sec. 21351 if that attorney’s personal
circumstances do not prevent him or her from forming a
disinterested judgment about the validity of a bequest.
Estate of Kraus (April 27, 2010)
Brother who wrongfully took sister's money before sister's death
must return property to estate, even if petitioners ultimately
were not entitled to funds.
Brother who wrongfully took sister's money before sister's death
must return property to estate, even if petitioners ultimately
were not entitled to funds.
Munn v. Briggs (June 10, 2010)
Son alleging interference with mother's codicil has adequate
remedy in probate and may not recover under tort of intentional
interference with expected inheritance.
Son alleging interference with mother's codicil has adequate
remedy in probate and may not recover under tort of intentional
interference with expected inheritance.
Luna v. Brownell (June 11, 2010)
Quitclaim deed transferring property to trustee in anticipation of
trust's creation is valid although trust did not exist when deed
was executed.
Quitclaim deed transferring property to trustee in anticipation of
trust's creation is valid although trust did not exist when deed
was executed.
Soria v. Soria (June 14, 2010)
Civil action alleging defendants breached their duties as
trustees and seeking an injunction to compel defendants to
produce an account--in an action in which the existence of a
trust was in dispute--was not a contest of a trustee’s account
within the meaning of Probate Code Sec. 17211(b), which
authorizes recovery of attorney fees by a beneficiary who
brings such a contest if the trustee unreasonably opposes the
contest.
Civil action alleging defendants breached their duties as
trustees and seeking an injunction to compel defendants to
produce an account--in an action in which the existence of a
trust was in dispute--was not a contest of a trustee’s account
within the meaning of Probate Code Sec. 17211(b), which
authorizes recovery of attorney fees by a beneficiary who
brings such a contest if the trustee unreasonably opposes the
contest.
2010)
Trust beneficiary's learning that he was a grandchild of trustor
did not place him on notice of a possible interest in the trust
prior to his learning of the trust's existence. Allegations that
petitioner was a grandchild of trustor and thus within the class
of persons designated as beneficiaries, that he learned of the
trust only when advised of its existence by a family member less
than three years prior to bringing petition, and that trustee
Trust beneficiary's learning that he was a grandchild of trustor
did not place him on notice of a possible interest in the trust
prior to his learning of the trust's existence. Allegations that
petitioner was a grandchild of trustor and thus within the class
of persons designated as beneficiaries, that he learned of the
trust only when advised of its existence by a family member less
than three years prior to bringing petition, and that trustee