Nov 30, 2021
A A A
TENTATIVE RULINGS
 
Probate Trust Calendar - TRUSTS
November 24, 2021 at 9:30 a.m.
Courtroom 18 – Hon. Jennifer V. Dollard
 
PLEASE NOTE: In accordance with the Order of the Presiding Judge, a party or representative of a party may appear personally in Courtroom 18 or may appear remotely through Zoom. 
 
Masks are required to be worn at all times while in the courthouse and may not be removed for any purpose, regardless of vaccination status.  Compliant mask coverings must cover the nose and mouth and do not include; 1) neck gaiters; 2) masks with valves or other holes; 3) bandanas; or 4) face shields.  This order applies to all interior spaces of the courthouse.  
 
CourtCall is not permitted for this calendar.
 
 
If the tentative ruling does not require appearances, and is accepted, no appearance is necessary. 
 
Any party who wishes to be heard in response or opposition to the Court’s tentative ruling MUST NOTIFY the Court’s Judicial Assistant by telephone at (707) 521-6893 and 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 (business) day immediately before the day of the hearing.
 
Unless notification of an appearance has been given as provided above, the tentative ruling shall become the ruling of the court the day of the hearing at the beginning of the calendar, absent an objection from an interested party per Probate Code section 1043.   
 
To Access the Probate Examiner Notes:
 
·         Navigate to the Home page of the Sonoma Superior Court website: www.sonoma.courts.ca.gov.
·         Choose Court Case Portal
·         Choose “Click here to access the Portal”
·         Accept the Terms
·         Choose Smart Search, insert your case number, and follow all instructions.
 
 
To Join Department 18 “Zoom” Online

Navigate to website: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83856098726?pwd=WEI3K1BPRCswSk0ZYSs4VUw1OU5ydz09
Enter MeetingID: 838-5609-8726
And Password: 000169
 
To Join Department 18 “Zoom” By Phone:

Call: +1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
Enter MeetingID: 838-5609-8726
And Password: 000169
 
Guide for Participating in Court Proceedings via Zoom for Dept 18:
 
-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. 

In re the Matter of William M. Harriman Trust
SPR095455
 
Tentative Ruling: The Court’s prior ruling in this matter stated, in part: 
 
If a resolution is not achieved, each party is directed to comply with Local Rule 6.2.G.3. and file a Statement of Issues or Settlement no less than least seven (7) court days prior to November 24, 2021. The statements should include a time estimate for any evidentiary hearing as well as how much time is needed for discovery prior to the setting of such a hearing. 
 
No statements of issues have been filed and the Court concludes that any disputes have been resolved by the meet and confer process. All other defects have been cured. Accordingly, the petition is APPROVED. 
 
The Court does note that the petition is verified by counsel on behalf of his client. It appears from the attorney verification this has been done because the Petitioner is absent from Sonoma County and because Petitioner has not yet been “appointed” as a fiduciary in these proceedings. However, given that Petitioner identifies himself as and is acting in the capacity of trustee, he is already a fiduciary in this matter. Even if that were not the case, CRC Rule 7.103(c) provides that a person who is seeking to become a fiduciary must verify the pleading. As this was not raised as one of the grounds for objection, it is deemed waived.
 


 
In re the Matter of the Mary Olive Trust
SPR 095705
 
TENTATIVE RULING: The Petition filed on May 27, 2021, is APPROVED. The Court will sign the proposed order submitted with the Petition with a modification dispensing with notice to Salvation Army Petaluma.
 


 
In re the Matter of the Florence Muller Trust
SPR096045
 
TENTATIVE RULING: At the request of Petitioner, the hearing on this matter is CONTINUED to February 18, 2022, at 9:30 a.m. in Department 23.
 


 
In re the Matter of the Duane R. Dawson Trust
SPR096061
 
TENTATIVE RULING: The hearing on the Petition filed October 13, 2021, is CONTINUED to February 18, 2022, at 9:30 a.m. in Department 23. The purpose of this continuance is to provide Petitioner with additional times to cure the following defects:
 
Petitioner is required to verify the contents of the Petition. All pleadings filed under the Probate Code must be verified. (See Rule 7.103(b) of the California Rules of Court.)
 
Petitioner has not served notice on anyone. “SGI-USA, a Nicherin Buddhist lay organization” is a contingent beneficiary in the event Petitioner does not achieve 65 years of age. Under Prob. Code § 15804(a)(1), contingent beneficiaries are entitled to notice.
 
Petitioner has not included information sufficient for the Court to determine whether Sonoma County is the proper venue. It appears Duane Dawson may have been a resident of another county when he passed away and that the principal place of administration of the Trust may be in another county. Petitioner is directed to file a Supplement to the Petition to include allegations as to why Sonoma County is the proper venue and jurisdiction for this matter.
 
Notice of the new hearing date and any supplemental pleadings, as well as the original pleadings, must be timely served, and proof of service filed with the court.
 
 
*THIS IS THE END OF THE TENTATIVE RULINGS*
 
 
© 2021 Superior Court of Sonoma County