Skip to main content.

Trusts

If the tentative ruling is accepted, no appearance by Zoom is necessary unless otherwise indicated. You must notify the probate clerk at (707) 521-6893 if you wish to be heard in response to the tentative ruling. You must inform the clerk concerning your appearance choice: Zoom or in person. Any interested party who wishes to be heard in opposition to a petition must notify all other parties of the intent to appear. Both notifications must be completed no later than 4:00 p.m. on the court day immediately preceding the day of the hearing.

Unless notification to the probate clerk has been given as provided above, the tentative rulings shall become the rulings of the court at 9:45 a.m. on the day of the hearing.  

To Join Department 23 “Zoom” Online

To Join Department 23 “Zoom” By Phone:

  • Call: +1 669 254 5252 US (San Jose) and enter same meeting ID and password as listed above.

Guide for Participating in Court Proceedings via Zoom for Dept 23:

  • After joining the meeting and checking in with the clerk, please mute your audio when not speaking. This helps keep background noise to a minimum.
  • Be mindful of background noise when your microphone is not muted. Avoid activities that could create additional noise, such as shuffling papers.
  • Position your camera properly if you choose to use a web camera. Be sure it is in a stable position and focused at eye level, if possible. Make sure everything visible in the frame is appropriate for an appearance in court.
  • If a confidential session becomes necessary it is incumbent on you to ensure you are able to participate from a private location so that unauthorized people cannot overhear or see the proceedings.
  • Chat is enabled for the sharing of documents among participants and the court and to allow attorneys to communicate individually with each other or their clients only. No chat messages should be sent privately to the court as it would amount to an unauthorized ex parte communication. Neither should chat messages be sent to all participants unless directed by the court.
  • The recording function has been disabled. Remember, the prohibition against recording court proceedings, even remote ones, remains.
  • Be patient. Check in will take more time and the experience from those who have tried this before is that proceedings are a little slower generally.

Tentative Rulings

Hon. Jennifer V. Dollard
May 10, 2024, at 9:30 a.m.

  1. Matter of Else Storm Rodrigues Trust
    23PR00337
    Petition for Order Requiring Accounting, Amended For Verification

Tentative Ruling: This matter is CONTINUED to August 23, 2024, at 9:30 a.m. in Dept. 23. The reason for the continuance is to allow the parties to cure the defects mentioned hereinbelow. Further, as this is a contested matter, the parties are ordered to meet and confer in compliance with local rule 6.2.F.2 and file statements of issues in compliance with local rule 6.2.F.3 at least seven (7) court days in advance of the continued hearing date.

On February 23, 2024, this Court directed the petitioner to verify his petition as required by California Probate Code (“Prob C”) §1021(a)(1). On March 25, 2024, the petitioner filed a verification with a defective jurat. California Code of Civil Procedure §2015.5. The petition is not properly verified. The Court will not proceed unless and until the petition is properly verified.  The Court notes substantial compliance with the statute is insufficient.  See Kulshrestha v. First Union Commercial Corp., (2004) 33 Cal.4th 601.

The response filed February 21, 2024, is not verified in violation of Prob C §1021(a)(2). The respondent is directed to file and serve a verified response at least seven (7) court days in advance of the next hearing.

The reply filed April 3, 2024, is not a recognized type of pleading. See Prob C §§1020, 1021. The Court, on its own motion, strikes the petitioner’s April 3, 2024, reply pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure §436(b). 

The Court notes that the papers on file, including petitioner’s untimely filed statement of issues, inappropriately include arguments regarding issues that go well beyond the scope of the petition, which is a petition for an accounting/information as to a trust. The Court will not decide issues such as the trust’s ownership of assets and whether a breach of fiduciary duty occurred under the present state of the pleadings.

Both the petition and the response are in stark violation of California Rules of Court rule 1.201(a)(2). The Court directs the parties’ attention to California Rule of Court rule 1.201(a), which states in part: “If financial account numbers are required in a pleading or other paper filed in the public file, only the last four digits of these numbers may be used.” Any future filings should comply with this rule.

 

  1. Matter of Alfred J. Kuck, Shirley E. Kuck Trust
    24PR00143
    Petition for Order Confirming Assets into Trust

Tentative Ruling: The Petition is GRANTED as to the settlor’s interest in 6700 Bodega Avenue, Petaluma, CA 94952 (APN 022-100-022.)

The petition is DENIED as to the settlor’s interest in 3200 Pepper Road, Petaluma, CA (APN 022-100-022) and the unimproved adjacent lot (APN 022-080-009) not already titled to the trust. A trust in relation to real property generally must be evidenced by a written instrument in order to be valid. Ukkestad v. RBS Asset Finance, Inc. (2015) 235 Cal.App.4th 156, 160. See also California Probate Code §15206. An undivided 25% ownership interest in the 3200 Pepper Road Property is titled to the trust. Petition ¶7 and Petition Ex. G at p. 80. As to whatever remaining interest in said property and the unimproved adjacent lot that was owned by the settlors during their life, no written instrument evidencing their intent to hold that interest in trust is presented, save the settlor’s pour-over will. Where a pour-over will gives property to a trust, and the property is not otherwise made part of the trust res, the property cannot be simply transferred to the trust without probate administration. Placencia v. Strazicich (2019) 42 Cal.App.5th 730, 743-744.

Petitioner shall lodge an updated proposed order that conforms to this ruling.

 

  1. Matter of Michael Lee Gagliardo Trust
    24PR00149
    Petition for Order Confirming Trust Assets

Tentative Ruling: This matter is CONTINUED to August 23, 2024, at 9:30 a.m. in Dept. 23 to allow the petitioner an opportunity to cure the notice/service defect discussed below.

A Redwood Credit Union account is the subject of this California Probate Code (“Prob C”) §850 Petition. Redwood Credit Union has not been served in compliance with Prob C §851(a)(2). Service by mail is inadequate. Pursuant to Prob C §851(a)(2), each person having possession of property that is the subject of a Prob C §850 petition must be served at least 30 days prior to the day of the hearing with the notice of the hearing and a copy of the petition, in the manner provided under California Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) §413.10 et seq. (i.e., in the manner of a summons.)  Pursuant to Prob C §851(d) the Court may not shorten the time for service under that section.

The Court directs petitioner’s attention to California Rule of Court rule 1.201(a), which states in part: “If financial account numbers are required in a pleading or other paper filed in the public file, only the last four digits of these numbers may be used.” Any future filings should comply with this rule.

 

  1. Matter of the Gretchen O. Black, Ivan D. Black Trust
    24PR00162
    Petition to Establish a Single Trust Under Trust Instrument

Tentative Ruling: The petition is GRANTED. The Court will sign the proposed order lodged February 21, 2024.

 

  1.  Matter of Theodora Spear Trust
    24PR00167
    Petition for Court Order Authorizing Transfer of Trustor's Property to Trust

Tentative Ruling: The Petition is GRANTED. The Court will sign the proposed order lodged February 22, 2024.

 

  1. Mellinger Family Trust
    SPR095509
    Petition Against the Trustee for Breaches of Trust and for Orders To: (1) Compel Accounting for Court Review, (2) Remove or Suspend Trustee, (3) Appointment of a Successor Trustee and/or Interim Successor Trustee, (4) Consideration of a Surcharge of Trustee and to Hold Trustee Personally Liable for Potential Accounting Issues; (5) For Instructions to Trustee

Tentative Ruling: This matter is CONTINUED to August 30, 2024, at 9:30 a.m. in Dept. 23 for the reasons set forth below.

Per the recently filed Statements of Issues, the parties are working towards informal resolution of this matter. Respondent plans to deliver an accounting to petitioner by mid-May 2024, and Petitioner wishes to review the accounting before deciding how to proceed. The Court does not order that the accounting be delivered by a certain date at this time.

As this is a contested matter, the parties are ordered to meet and confer in compliance with local rule 6.2.F.2 and, if the matter has not resolved, to file statements of issues at least seven (7) court days in advance of the continued hearing date in compliance with local rule 6.2.F.3.

 

  1. Matter of Edgar A. Castellini and Mary M. Castellini Revocable Trust dated May 4, 1981
    SPR097863
    Petition for Accounting and Compelling Redress of Breach of Trust

Tentative Ruling: Per the Statement of Issues filed by the petitioner on May 3, 2024, the parties are continuing to work towards a resolution of this matter but have not yet reached a final agreement. Also, counsel for the respondent will be on a pre-planned vacation on May 10, 2024, the present hearing date. As such, this matter is CONTINUED to August 23, 2024, at 9:30 a.m. in Dept. 23.

The parties are ordered to meet and confer in compliance with local rule 6.2.F.2 and file updated

statements of issues in compliance with local rule 6.2.F.3 at least seven (7) court days in advance of the continued hearing date.

 

  1. Matter of the Dominis Family Revocable Trust dated July 8, 2021
    SPR097988
    Petition for Order Confirming Title to Trust Assets

Tentative Ruling: The Petition is GRANTED. The Court will sign the proposed order lodged August 15, 2023.

 

  1. Matter of the Gerald Matheson and Nancy C. Dayton-Matheson Revocable Trust
    SPR096861

Petition for Determination of Ownership of Asset

Tentative Ruling: This matter is being heard at 10:00 a.m. on May 10, 2024, in Dept. 23.

APPEARANCES REQUIRED. The Court intends to set this matter for trial. Counsel for the parties should be prepared to discuss trial availability and length of trial estimates. The issue to be tried is whether the asset ($704,968.14) should be confirmed as an asset of Lori Olson, or an asset of the trust.

While this case is pending, the money is authorized to be held by interim trustee Heidi Darling in federally insured, interest bearing, blocked accounts, in the name of the trust. This decision has no relation to the merits of either party’s position and will have no bearing on the Court’s ultimate decision regarding the rightful owner of the funds. Counsel for Lori Olson shall submit the proposed order(s) necessary to effectuate this ruling.

While neither party has addressed Lori Olson’s Petition for Removal of Trustee and for Appointment of Successor Trustee filed July 25, 2022, in their Statements of Issues for some time, it has not been dismissed, and there are active issues raised by said petition, including who the permanent trustee will be, and attorney’s fees and costs. The Court notes that it may dismiss this petition for lack of prosecution if it is not brought to trial within two years from the date the action was commenced. California Code of Civil Procedure §§583.410, 583.420(a)(2)(B), and CRC Rule 3.1340(a). While two years has not yet passed, the two-year mark is quickly approaching.

 

***End of Tentative Rulings***

Was this helpful?

Yes No
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Was this helpful?