Estates & Other Probate

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, and whether they will appear in person or by Zoom. 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:

  • Access the Portal
  • Accept the Terms
  • Choose Smart Search, insert your case number, and follow all instructions.

To Join Department 12 “Zoom” Online

To Join Department 12 “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 12:

  • 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

August 21, 2026 at 9:30 a.m.

  1. Estate of Patricia Inez Claxton
    24PR00113
    Account & Report

Tentative Ruling: NO APPEARANCES REQUIRED.  APPROVED.  The Court will sign the proposed order lodged August 14, 2026.

 

  1. Estate of Paul E. Ciraulo
    24PR00998
    Waiver of Account & Report

Tentative Ruling: APPROVED. NO APPEARANCES REQUIRED. Any future court dates are DROPPED from calendar.  The Order to Show Cause issued by the Court on June 3, 2026 is DISMISSED.

 

  1. Estate of Sally Lynne Walburn
    25PR00025
    Waiver of Account & Report

Tentative Ruling: APPROVED.  NO APPEARANCES REQUIRED. Any future court dates are DROPPED from calendar.  The Order to Show Cause issued by the Court on April 22, 2026 is DISMISSED.

 

  1. Estate of Jill Dilley
    25PR00121
    Account & Report

Tentative Ruling: APPROVED. NO APPEARANCES REQUIRED. Any future court dates are DROPPED from calendar. 

 

  1. Estate of Jean Crichton
    25PR00400
    Waiver of Account & Report

Tentative Ruling: NO APPEARANCES REQUIRED.  The Court notes that the Petition for Final Distribution does not distribute the estate assets in compliance with decedent’s will, which was admitted to probate.  The pour over will distributes all assets to the Trustee of the Jean J. Crichton Family Trust.  It is unclear why the petitioner has treated this estate as one of intestacy.  This matter is CONTINUED to September 24, 2026, at 9:30 a.m. in Department 63.  Please refer to the Probate Examiner Notes.  However, if petitioner is the is the successor trustee of the trust and the sole beneficiary of the trust, he may file a copy of the trust and verified supplement so stating and request to appear for the purpose of presenting it to the Court.  In that event, and absent objection, the Court would be inclined to accept an oral amendment to the petition for final distribution to distribute the estate to the successor trustee of the Jean J. Crichton Family Trust, and avoid the continuance.  If an amended petition is approved, a new proposed order will be required.

 

  1. Estate of Byron Mellberg
    25PR01118
    Waiver of Account & Report

Tentative Ruling: APPROVED. NO APPEARANCES REQUIRED. Any future court dates are DROPPED from calendar. 

 

  1. Estate of Selma Jacobson
    25PR01249
    Account & Report

Tentative Ruling: APPROVED. NO APPEARANCES REQUIRED. Any future court dates are DROPPED from calendar. 

 

  1. Estate of Susan M. Weiss
    26PR00024
    Preliminary Distribution

Tentative Ruling: NO APPEARANCES REQUIRED. The Petition for Preliminary Distribution is DENIED without prejudice.  The Court has insufficient information to make the mandatory finding that the distribution may be made without loss to creditors or injury to the estate or any interested person.  Probate Code §11621.  This is not addressed by the petition, supplement or included in the proposed order.

 

  1. Estate of Mary Nesvold
    26PR00556
    Letters of Administration

Tentative Ruling: APPROVED. NO APPEARANCES REQUIRED. No bond is required as all heirs have waived bond. Petitioner is to file an Inventory and Appraisal within four months of issuance of letters (Prob. Code section 8800(b)) and either a petition for an order for final distribution of the estate or a report of status of administration within the timeframe set out in Probate Code section 12200.

The matter is SET on the October 21, 2027, probate case management conference calendar at 3:00 p.m. in Department 63 for status of estate or final account and distribution. No appearances at the hearing will be required if the court determines that administration of the estate is timely proceeding, or good cause is shown why more time is required.

 

10 & 11. Estate of Melinda Boley
                    26PR00616
                    Petitions for Letters of Administration

Tentative Ruling:   On May 15, 2026, John Farley filed a petition for letters of administration.  He alleged decedent died intestate and that he, as decedent’s uncle, was the only heir.  The petition was set for hearing on July 2, 2026.  Prior to that hearing, no objection to the petition was filed.  However, on June 26, 2026, a second petition for letters of administration was filed by Lori Merrill as the nominee of William Boley.  That petition alleged decedent died intestate and that William is the half brother of the decedent. The second petition by Merrill, later amended to include the nomination, was set for hearing on August 21, 2026.  The Farley petition was procedurally postured to be granted at the July 2, 2026 hearing, however the tentative ruling was to continue it to the present hearing date in light of the competing petition filed.  However, no objection was made at or before the initial hearing as required by Probate Code section 1043.  The Court questions whether any objection now is waived, or whether petitioner Merrill has legal authority to support the proposition that the competing petition acted as an objection.  In addition, on July 2, 2026, when the tentative ruling was adopted, the Court ordered the parties to file statements of issues in accordance with the local rules if their mandated meet and confer efforts did not entirely resolve any dispute.  No statements of issues have been filed by any party.

In light of the failure to object to the petition of Mr. Farley, and the complete absence of any update from the parties, the Court is inclined to approve the petition filed May 15, 2026.  The Court will therefore issue a tentative ruling consistent with this conclusion.  But it is the Court’s strong suspicion that it will finally get an update when at least petitioner Merrill requests to appear.  But maybe not, if there is no objection to petitioner Farley acting as administrator, only a dispute as to the heir(s).  In the absence of compliance with the Court’s prior order to timely file statements of issues, the Court is left to guess.  Until then, NO APPEARANCES REQUIRED.

The petition filed May 15, 2026 by petitioner Farley is APPROVED, no objection having been filed.  Bond in the amount of $707,000 is required as petitioner is an out of state resident and as there may be a dispute about the intestate heirs of the decedent. Petitioner is to file an Inventory and Appraisal within four months of issuance of letters (Prob. Code section 8800(b)) and either a petition for an order for final distribution of the estate or a report of status of administration within the timeframe set out in Probate Code section 12200.

The matter is SET on the October 21, 2027, probate case management conference calendar at 3:00 p.m. in Department 63 for status of estate or final account and distribution. No appearances at the hearing will be required if the court determines that administration of the estate is timely proceeding, or good cause is shown why more time is required.

 

  1. Estate of Patsy Marie Roper
    26PR00682
    Probate of Will

Tentative Ruling: NO APPEARANCES REQUIRED.  This matter is CONTINUED to October 2, 2026, at 9:30 a.m. in Department 12.  Please refer to the Probate Examiner Notes and the previously issued tentative ruling.

 

  1. Estate of Gary Enrico Gomes
    26PR00794
    Letters of Administration

Tentative Ruling: NO APPEARANCES REQUIRED.  This matter is CONTINUED to October 2, 2026, at 9:30 a.m. in Department 63.  Please refer to the Probate Examiner Notes.

 

  1. Estate of Joseph Pee
    26PR00795
    Probate of Will

Tentative Ruling: NO APPEARANCES REQUIRED.  This matter is CONTINUED to October 2, 2026, at 9:30 a.m. in Department 12.  Please refer to the Probate Examiner Notes.

 

  1. Estate of Michael Sicolone
    26PR00796
    Letters of Administration

Tentative Ruling:  NO APPEARANCES REQUIRED.  Matter is CONTINUED to September 4, 2026 at 9:30 a.m. in Dept. 63.  All notes have been cleared except that the proof of publication filed is defective.  The Court cannot accept a declaration attesting to the trust of a fact that has not yet happened (the publisher signed the affidavit before publication was completed).  A new proof of publication is required with a jurat dated after publication is completed. 

 

  1. Estate of Robert Patrick Hamilton
    26PR00800
    Probate of Will

Tentative Ruling: APPROVED. NO APPEARANCES REQUIRED. No bond is required as the will waives bond. Petitioner is to file an Inventory and Appraisal within four months of issuance of letters (Prob. Code section 8800(b)) and either a petition for an order for final distribution of the estate or a report of status of administration within the timeframe set out in Probate Code section 12200.

The matter is SET on the October 21, 2027, probate case management conference calendar at 3:00 p.m. in Department 63 for status of estate or final account and distribution. No appearances at the hearing will be required if the court determines that administration of the estate is timely proceeding, or good cause is shown why more time is required.

 

  1. Estate of Jack Steven Nunez
    26PR00801
    Probate of Will

Tentative Ruling: NO APPEARANCES REQUIRED.  This matter is CONTINUED to October 2, 2026, at 9:30 a.m. in Department 63 to allow Petitioner time to file additional documents in compliance with Probate Code section 12521.  Please refer to the Probate Examiner Notes.

 

  1. Estate of Cary Ostofre
    26PR00802
    Determine Succession to R/P

Tentative Ruling: APPROVED. NO APPEARANCES REQUIRED. 

 

  1. Estate of Richard James Badolato
    SPR-097146
    Account & Report

Tentative Ruling:  NO APPEARANCES REQUIRED.  Based on the updates filed by administrator on July 29, 2026 and August 17, 2026, the Court understands that the objections of SureTec Insurance Company, and Inheritance Funding Company, have been resolved consistent with the revised proposed order submitted with the August 17, 2026 update.  The Court notes any objection by Jennifer Baldolato is waived, not having been filed and served by July 20, 2026.  The only remaining issue for resolution is the measure of double damages. 

On that issue, the Court has considered the case of Estate of Ashlock, (2020) 45 Cal.App.5th 1066, but it is the Court’s view is that the reasoning of Conservatorship of Ribal, (2019) 31 Cal.App.5th 519, is more persuasive.  The two sections at issue operate for separate purposes.  The reference to “property recovered” in Probate Code section 859 is merely a measure for setting the amount of liability.  Otherwise, total liability would depend on whether there was property actually recovered under Probate Code section 856 or not, which would result in inconsistency in applying the statutory scheme. It would also make superfluous the additional categories of property concealed or disposed of, which could not be recovered.  This Court therefore disagrees that the penalties available under the Probate Code operate as argued in Ashlock.  As an example, if a respondent was found to have wrongfully taken in bad faith a $10,000 bottle of wine, if the bottle is recovered a prevailing party would be entitled to a judgment valued at $30,000 (the bottle and twice its value) under the reasoning of Ashlock.  However, if the wine has been consumed and cannot be recovered, a strict reading of Ashlock would mean that Probate Code section 859 does not apply, as there was no property recovered.  But if the “property recovered” is merely a watermark by which to set the basis for imposing double liability, recovery of the wine is irrelevant and double liability would be liability in the amount of $20,000.  If the wine is recovered, $10,000 of that liability is satisfied, and yet a penalty remains. 

 The Court orders that “double damages” be calculated consistent with the case of Conservatorship of Ribal and that a revised proposed order be submitted.  Otherwise, the petition, as modified by this ruling and the proposed order lodged August 14, 2026, is APPROVED.

 

***End of Tentative Rulings***