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 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

December 19, 2025, at 9:30 a.m.  

  1. Matter of Alberta I. Goetz Trust
    24PR00959
    Petition For Accounting and For Information Related to Trust Administration

Tentative Ruling: The petitioner’s recently filed statement of issues indicates that the parties have not had a chance to meet and confer. The petitioner requests this matter be continued for further status conference. Therefore, this matter is CONTINUED to April 17, 2026 at 9:30 a.m. in Dept. 12..  The parties are ordered to meet and confer in compliance with local rule 6.2.F.2 and, should the matter not fully resolve, 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.

 

  1. Matter of William H. Ator, Celia P Ator Trust
    24PR01054
    Petition to Invalidate the Fourth Amendment to the William H. Ator and Celia P. Ator Trust, etc. filed November 21, 2024

Tentative Ruling: APPEARANCES REQUIRED. The Restated Amendment dated April 3, 2012, paragraph 2.L. contains a requirement that any dispute with regard to the distribution of the trust is subject to arbitration, except challenges to the settlor’s capacity and for removal of a fiduciary, absent a waiver by all interested parties. The Court notes the current petition does include to a challenge to the distribution of the trust. There is no waiver of the requirement for arbitration by all interested parties. The respondent’s Statement of Issues, filed September 17, 2025, indicates he has not waived the arbitration requirement.

The active petition in this case was filed in November of 2024. The Court has not received any status update since September of 2025. Given the age of this case, the Court is inclined to hear from the parties as to the status of settlement and discovery. If no substantial progress has been made towards resolution, and in the absence of a waiver of the arbitration requirements by all interested parties, the Court will order the parties to arbitrate at the hearing.

 

  1. Matter of James E Cook, Margaret C Cook Trust
    25PR00281
    Petition to Appoint Fiduciary as Successor Trustee; for Accounting; for Surcharge Against June F. Cook and Maureen E. Cline for Payment of Attorney’s Fees and Costs

Tentative Ruling: There being no opposition to the summary of damages, damages, including double damages, are GRANTED as prayed, except as set forth below.

Regarding damages for lost rent, as June F. Cook is a remainder beneficiary as to one quarter (1/4) of the trust, the Court will reduce the amount of damages for lost rent by 25% of the amount requested. Damages for lost rent as stated in the summary of damages is $55,331.95, but the Court will only award $41,498.96.

Counsel for the petitioner shall lodge an updated proposed order that conforms to this ruling.

 

  1. Matter of Patricia Stump Griffin Trust
    25PR00302
    First and Final Accounting

Tentative Ruling: The Petition is GRANTED. The Court will sign the Proposed Order lodged on September 12, 2025.

 

  1. Matter of The Carole G. Rosvold 2014 Revocable Trust
    25PR00730
    Verified Petition for Order (1) Compelling Accounting; (2) Compelling Information Concerning Trust Assets and Administration; (3) Instructing Trustees to Carry Out Duties; (4) Removing Co-Successor Trustees for Breach of Fiduciary Duty; (5) Imposing Surcharge and Damages; and (6) Awarding Attorney’s Fees and Costs

Tentative Ruling: In advance of the initial hearing a tentative ruling on the merits was posted. The parties stipulated to continue the initial hearing and indicated they were working towards an accounting. The tentative ruling was not adopted. The matter was continued to the present hearing date. No opposition to the petition has been filed, and there is no status update. Therefore, this matter is CONTINUED to April 17, 2026 at 9:30 a.m. in Department 12. Any opposition to the petition must be filed at or before the continued hearing, or it will be deemed WAIVED. If the matter has not resolved, the petitioner is directed to file status update at least seven (7) court days in advance of the continued hearing.

 

  1. Matter of The Diane G. Alvarez Revocable Trust
    25PR01051
    Petition to Determine Validity of Purported Trust; to Declare Transfer of Real Property to Trust is Invalid and Declare Such Transfer Void

Tentative Ruling: This matter is CONTINUED to April 17, 2026 at 9:30 a.m. in Department 12 for the reasons set forth below.

There is no proof of service in the Court’s file. A number of beneficiaries are entitled to notice of this petition but have not been served. The petitioner must timely serve all necessary parties with code compliant notice of the continued hearing date and file proof(s) of service.

The petition does not indicate the status of the settlor, Diane G. Alvarez. The Court will require the petitioner to serve and file a verified supplement, at least seven (7) court days prior to the continued hearing, indicating the petitioner’s status (i.e. is she deceased, incapacitated, or alive and well?)

The Court does not find any basis for venue in Sonoma County. The situs of trust administration is Concord, CA, in Contra Costa County. Axia Santos, the trustee, has opposed the petition and does not indicate any intention of resigning as trustee. So, venue is proper in Contra Costa County per California Probate Code §§17002 and 17005. The Court invites the parties to serve and file, at least seven (7) court days prior to the continued hearing, verified supplements addressing this issue.  In the absence of a basis for venue here, the Court is inclined to dismiss the petition without prejudice at the next hearing should it still be pending.

The opposition is not verified, in violation of California Probate Code §1021(a)(2). If the trustee fails to file and serve a verified opposition at least 10 days in advance of the continued hearing, the Court will strike the opposition on file (mistakenly titled a “Reply”) and will bar any further opposition by the trustee as untimely.

On September 12, 2025 Gustavo Alvarez filed his petition to determine validity of purported trust, etc. On November 13, 2025 Axia Santos filed her opposition to said petition. As this is now a contested matter, the parties are ordered to comply with local rules 6.2.F.2 and 6.2.F.3 in advance of the continued hearing.

 

  1. Matter of The Adelita F. Sipin Living Trust
    25PR01066
    Petition to Confirm Trust Assets

Tentative Ruling: The Petition is GRANTED. The Court will sign the Proposed Order lodged on September 17, 2025.

 

  1. Matter of the James Curtis Flint Trust
    25PR01069
    Petition for Orders to: 1) Authorize and Direct Conveyance of Real Property from Third Party Claimant to Trust; (2) Fraud; (3) Undue Influence; (4) Lack of Capacity; (5) Compel Trustee to Produce Code Compliant Accounting; (6) Order for Damages and Attorney’s Fees

Tentative Ruling: This matter has been continued to April 10, 2026 at 9:30 a.m. in Department 12 by stipulation of the parties.

 

  1. Matter of the Joseph Gerald Everett Trust
    25PR01072
    Petition to Appoint Successor Trustee and Approve Attorney's Fees

Tentative Ruling: The matter is CONTINUED to April 10, 2026 at 9:30 a.m. in Dept. 12 to allow Petitioner to address the defects noted below.

The Petition is unverified in violation of Probate Code section 1021(a)(1) and California Rules of Court, Rule 7.103(b). The Petition also does not contain an allegation of Settlor’s death that would allow the Court to appoint a successor trustee. Furthermore, Petitioner’s counsel’s request for attorney fees in the amount of $5,000.00 is unsupported by any evidence, such as timesheets or a verified declaration, detailing counsel’s hourly rate or the number of hours spent in connection with this Petition.  Any amendment or supplement to the petition must be filed and served at least 10 days in advance of the continued hearing date.  If the lack of verification is not cured prior to the continued hearing, the Court will strike the petition and drop the matter from calendar.

 

  1. Matter of the Jackson Family Living Trust dated June 13, 2016
    SPR096884
    Petition for Instructions and for Order to Sell Real Property

Tentative Ruling: APPEARANCES REQUIRED.  Per the respondent’s Statement of Issues filed December 15, 2026, the parties have agreed to mediation in an attempt to reach a global resolution. The parties are hereby REFERRED to the court’s settlement panelist program. The Court’s judicial assistant will send the parties a list of volunteer settlement conference panelists and instructions for use of the program.  However, given the age of the case and the history of litigation, which includes long periods of non-responsiveness by the former trustee, the Court also finds it appropriate to simultaneously set this matter for trial.  The Court will set a trial date sufficiently in the future to allow the parties an opportunity to engage in alternative dispute resolution efforts prior to trial.  Counsel should be prepared to discuss trial availability and time estimates.  The parties are ordered to continue to comply with local rules 6.2.F.2 and 6.2.F.3 in advance of the trial.

The Court has not considered the Statement of Issues filed by Ross M. Jackson on December 10, 2025. The only active petition in this case is the Petition for Instructions and for Order to Sell Real Property filed July 1, 2025. Ross M. Jackson did not join in that petition, he did not file any response to the petition, nor has he otherwise generally appeared with respect to the active petition. Therefore, Ross M. Jackson is not a party to the active dispute and it is not appropriate for him to file a Statement of Issues under Sonoma County Local Rule 6.2.F.3.

 

  1. Matter of the Frank P. Corcoran and Lethea L. Corcoran Trust dated January 10, 1992
    SPR097717
    Petition to Determine Breach of Trust and to Surcharge Former Trustee and Beneficiary, Terri L. Bennetto, With Offset from Her Beneficial Interest in the Trust; to Award Fees and Costs From Trust to Petitioner Andrea Bennetto; For Instructions to Trustee Regarding Subtrust Funding and Allocation of Assets

Tentative Ruling: The petition is GRANTED as prayed as to proposed orders number 1, 2, 5, 6, and 8. As to proposed orders number 3, 4 and 7, the petition is GRANTED as set forth below.

Regarding proposed orders number 3 and 4, the petitioner seeks $28,000.00 in lost rent. As discussed below, the Court considers the trust real property to be an asset of the survivor’s trust. Terri Lynn Bennetto is a 50% remainder beneficiary of the survivor’s trust and thus is entitled to 50% of the rental value of the property. Therefore, the court will only award $14,000.00 in lost rent.

Regarding proposed order number 7, the petitioner suggests splitting the remaining assets of the trust equally between the residual trust and the survivor’s trust prior to distributing the assets. This is contrary to the surviving settlor’s intent and his actions while serving as trustee. While serving as trustee, the surviving settlor designated assets to the survivor’s trust and the residuary trust under the 2nd through 6th amendments. The Court will give effect to these expressions of the surviving settlor’s intent, as most recently stated in the 6th amendment. There has been no invalidation of the 6th amendment or any other trust here, nor is one sought. Therefore, the exhibits to the 6th amendment control the allocation of assets between the subtrusts.

Counsel for the petitioner shall lodge an updated proposed order that conforms to this ruling.

 

  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: APPEARANCES REQUIRED. The Court is inclined to hear from the petitioner Edgar M. Castellini (“Edgar”) about his position with respect to the proposed settlement and the case generally. Appearances by counsel or via Zoom are acceptable. If there is no substantive update provided by Edgar at the hearing the Court will take that to mean he has no objection to the settlement and will approve it without his signature.

 

***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?