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 Access the Probate Examiner Notes:

  • Access the Portal
  • Accept the Terms
  • Select Smart Search, enter your case number, and follow the 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 14, 2026, at 9:30 a.m.  

  1. Matter of Else Storm Rodrigues Trust
    23PR00337
    Petition to Compel Redress Per CA Probate §17000, §16420 of Trustee’s Breach of Trust, per §16000, §16004, (A) AND (C) §16009, and 16400 to Compel Trustee to Account per Terms of Trust, to Determine Trust is Voidable, and Request the Court Take Any Other Action Necessary Per §17206

Tentative Ruling: APPEARANCES REQUIRED for trial setting. The parties should be prepared to discuss their trial availability and estimates for length of trial.  The first trial dates available in Department 63 are Spring 2027.

 

  1. Matter of Scott Lindquist OBRA 93 Special Needs Trust
    24PR00582
    First Account and Report of Trustee; Petition for Settlement; for Reduction of Bond; for Approval of Trustee Fees; and for Approval of Fees and Costs Advanced to Attorneys

Tentative Ruling: This matter is CONTINUED to November 25, 2026 at 9:30 a.m. in Department 63 for the reasons set forth below.

The trust requires accountings to comply with Probate Code [Prob C] §§2620-2628. Trust, 4.03 at subsection 6. Prob C §2620(c) requires financial statements to be lodged in support of the accounting. At the initial hearing on this petition, the impediment to granting the petition was the lack of supporting financial statements. Supporting statements were lodged July 21, 2026. The accounting shows Exchange Bank account no. 2827 held $78,642.04 at the end of the accounting period, but the statements show $77,754.32. The Court finds no explanation for this discrepancy. Also, the statements for the Merrill Lynch account no. 1791 do not corroborate the cash on hand at the end reflected in the accounting. No statements are provided for the Oakmont Gardens Credit or the True Link Cards. The purpose of the continuance is to allow the petitioner an additional opportunity to comply with Prob C §2620(c). The Court will allow one more continuance before dismissing the matter without prejudice pursuant to Local Rule 6.2(C)(2)(c).

 

  1. Matter of Sechrist Family Trust
    25PR01188
    Petition for Order Confirming Trust Property and to Terminate Subtrusts

Tentative Ruling: The petition as to Tahoe Sports LLC is APPROVED.  Petitioner shall submit a new proposed order consistent with the Court’s ruling.  The Court notes that the evidence that the settlor intended to hold the operating assets of the LLC, the real property, in trust is clear.  However, the evidence that the settlor intended to hold the LLC itself in trust is circumstantial, and less clear.  In light of the fact the underlying real property was titled to the trust, and the fact the beneficiaries are the same regardless of the outcome of this petition, the Court has resolved any doubts in favor of granting the petition in this case.

 

  1. Matter of Charleen LaRue Albanese Trust
    26PR00523
    Petition to Determine the Validity of the Power of Attorney and Modification of Trust

Tentative Ruling: The matter is CONTINUED to December 4, 2026 at 9:30 a.m. in Department 63 for the reasons set forth below.

The petition is not verified in strict compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure §2015.5. Substantial compliance with the verification statute is insufficient. See Kulshrestha v. First Union Commercial Corp., (2004) 33 Cal.4th 601.

The response contains affirmative claims against the petitioner, including, but not limited to, a request for an accounting, a claim that the petitioner breached fiduciary duties, and a claim that the petitioner misappropriated the settlor-principal’s property. These claims are not properly included in a response and are not properly before the Court. California Probate Code §1000(a) and California Code of Civil Procedure §431.30. The claims for affirmative relief should be raised by petition if the party wishes to pursue relief in connection with them.

As this is now 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 at least seven (7) court days in advance of the continued hearing in compliance with local rule 6.2.F.3.  If the parties have not already done so, they should discuss whether an expert medical evaluation of the present cognitive state of the settlor should be performed, whether the settlor consents to such an examination and whether a guardian ad litem should be appointed for the settlor, and if so, who is nominated and willing to serve.

 

  1. Matter of The Barbara S Valverde Trust
    26PR00555
    Petition Confirming Real Property to Revocable Trust with Consent of All Beneficiaries

Tentative Ruling: The petition is GRANTED. The Court will sign the proposed order lodged May 4, 2026.

 

  1. Matter of Yolanda DeRouen Trust
    26PR00561
    Petition for Order Confirming Existence of Trust and Title to Trust Assets

Tentative Ruling: This matter is CONTINUED to November 25, 2026 at 9:30 am in Department 63 for the reasons set forth below.

The petition is not verified as required by California Probate Code [Prob C] §1021(a)(1). Also, there is no proof of service filed, so the Court cannot determine whether service was made in accordance with Prob C §§851 and 17203. The Court notes that notice to the personal representative of the settlor’s estate (and if none, to each heir and devisee of the decedent, and all persons named as executors of the will of the decedent, so far as known to the petitioner) is due pursuant to Prob C §17203(c).

The Court also notes the general rule that a trustee who is not licensed to practice law may not normally self-represent when litigating on behalf of the trust. However, the primary concern raised by a personal representative appearing in propria persona is that they are representing the interests of others and not just themselves. Estate of Sanchez (2023) 95 Cal.App.5th 331, 341. Here, the petitioner is the sole trustee and the sole beneficiary with respect to the asset at issue in the petition. Therefore, the petitioner is not representing the interests of others, but is only representing her own interests in this matter, so she may appear self-represented. See Aulisio v. Bancroft (2014) 230 Cal.App.4th 1516, 1525.

 

  1. Matter of The Juanita M. Hennessey Trust
    26PR00575
    Petition to Confirm Trust Assets

Tentative Ruling: The petition is GRANTED. The Court will sign the proposed order lodged May 7, 2026.

 

  1. Matter of Randy J. Stewart Trust
    26PR00591
    Petition for Order Confirming Assets in Trust

Tentative Ruling: The petition is GRANTED. The Court will sign the proposed order lodged May 11, 2026.

 

**End of Tentative Rulings**