Dean McAdams Los Angeles Paralegal Services
322 Culver Blvd. #144
Playa del Rey, CA 90293
LDA License No. 401 - Bonded
Reviews
Litigation
Federal
Divorce
Marital
Settlement
Agreements
Probate
Conservatorship
Resources
Defaults
Trusts
Estate Planning
Answers
Complaints
Petitions
Motions
Guardianship
Research
Writing
Cite Checking
Attorneys
Blogs
JANE DOE, Self-Represented California Trust Litigation Document Services
www.LegalNoodle.com
322 Culver Blvd., #144
Playa del Rey, CA 90293
(320) 944-2055
Petitioner, In Pro Per
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, NORTH WEST DISTRICT
In Re
THE YOUR MOTHER’S LIVING TRUSTESTABLISHED JULY 19, 2003-------------------------------------------------------------
JANE DOE,
Petitioner,v.
SIBLING BENEFICIARY NAMED AS CO-TRUSTEE AND SIBLING RESPONDENT TO TRUST LITIGATION, CO-TRUSTEES OF THE YOUR MOTHER’S LIVING TRUST.
Respondents.Case No.: PETITION TO DETERMINE VALIDITY OF PURPORTED TRUST AMENDMENT; SUSPEND AND REMOVE CO-TRUSTEES AND APPOINTMENT OF SUCCESSOR TRUSTEE; FOR OTHER RELIEF FOR BREACH OF TRUST; FOR AN ACCOUNTING; FOR INSTRUCTIONS [PROBATE CODE §§15642, 16420, 17200]
DATE:
TIME:
DEPT:
Petitioner, JANE DOE, alleges as follows:1.YOUR MOTHER, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner’s Mother, died on February 15, 2009. At the time of her death she resided at Avenue, City of Sylmar, County of Los Angeles, State of California and left property in that jurisdiction.
YOUR MOTHER, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner’s Mother, died on February 15, 2009. At the time of her death she resided at Avenue, City of Sylmar, County of Los Angeles, State of California and left property in that jurisdiction.2.Jurisdiction is proper in that Petitioner’s Mother’s Trust is being administered at 100 S. Broadway Avenue, Glendale, Los Angeles County, California. Venue is appropriate as the Respondents are both residents of Los Angeles County, California.
Jurisdiction is proper in that Petitioner’s Mother’s Trust is being administered at 100 S. Broadway Avenue, Glendale, Los Angeles County, California. Venue is appropriate as the Respondents are both residents of Los Angeles County, California.3.On or about July 19, 2003, Petitioner’s Mother, as Settlor, executed a document purporting to create a revocable living trust (“Petitioner’s Mother’s Trust”). Petitioner’s Mother’s Trust instructs the Co-Trustees to “divide and distribute the net income and principal of the Trust Estate for the benefit of the Settlor’s named beneficiaries as follows: JANE DOE [“Petitioner”], Jill Victoria Castaneda [“Jill”], Jessica Linda Sibling (sic) [“Jessica], Robert Smith, SIBLING RESPONDENT TO TRUST LITIGATION [“Margie”], Oliva Christina Wyatt, share and share alike.” A true and correct copy of Petitioner’s Mother’s Trust, as received from Respondents, is attached hereto as EXHIBIT “A”.
On or about July 19, 2003, Petitioner’s Mother, as Settlor, executed a document purporting to create a revocable living trust (“Petitioner’s Mother’s Trust”). Petitioner’s Mother’s Trust instructs the Co-Trustees to “divide and distribute the net income and principal of the Trust Estate for the benefit of the Settlor’s named beneficiaries as follows: JANE DOE [“Petitioner”], Jill Victoria Castaneda [“Jill”], Jessica Linda Sibling (sic) [“Jessica], Robert Smith, SIBLING RESPONDENT TO TRUST LITIGATION [“Margie”], Oliva Christina Wyatt, share and share alike.” A true and correct copy of Petitioner’s Mother’s Trust, as received from Respondents, is attached hereto as EXHIBIT “A”.4.On or about January 23, 2009, Petitioner’s Mother also allegedly executed a document titled “Amendment to the YOUR MOTHER’S Living Trust Dated July 19, 2003.” A true and correct copy of this purported amendment (the “Purported Amendment”), as received from Respondents, is attached hereto as EXHIBIT “B”.
On or about January 23, 2009, Petitioner’s Mother also allegedly executed a document titled “Amendment to the YOUR MOTHER’S Living Trust Dated July 19, 2003.” A true and correct copy of this purported amendment (the “Purported Amendment”), as received from Respondents, is attached hereto as EXHIBIT “B”.5.Petitioner is a person interested in both the devolution of the estate and proper administration of Petitioner’s Mother’s Trust because Petitioner is decedent’s daughter and a beneficiary of Petitioner’s Mother’s Trust, and therefore has standing to bring this petition.
Petitioner is a person interested in both the devolution of the estate and proper administration of Petitioner’s Mother’s Trust because Petitioner is decedent’s daughter and a beneficiary of Petitioner’s Mother’s Trust, and therefore has standing to bring this petition.INVALID TRUST
6.The Court should rescind and nullify the Purported Amendment on the following grounds:
The Court should rescind and nullify the Purported Amendment on the following grounds:a.First Ground:At the time of the alleged execution of the Purported Amendment, the Petitioner’s Mother was not of sound and disposing mind. Petitioner is informed and believes and thereon alleges that, at the time the purported Amendment was executed her mother did not have sufficient mental capacity to (i) understand the nature of her actions in executing the Purported Amendment, (ii) understand and recollect the nature and situation of her property, and (iii) remember and understand her relations to other family members.b.Second Ground:Petitioner is informed and believes and thereon alleges that the Purported Amendment is not and never was the result of Petitioner’s Mother’s freewill and was made at the time of its alleged execution as a result of undue influence exerted by Respondents, Jill and others. The undue influence consisted of the following:(i)Petitioner is informed and believes and based on such information alleges that her mother battled cancer for the last five years of her life. Jessica and Jill lived with Petitioner’s Mother during the last five years before her death and occupied positions of trust and confidence with Petitioner’s Mother. During that Petitioner’s Mother’s health progressively worsened and Petitioner’s Mother put her trust and confidence in Jessica, Margie and Jill. During this time Jessica, Margie and Jill isolated decedent from her close friends and relatives, including the Petitioner.(ii)During this time, Petitioner’s Mother was taking various medications for treatment of pain, anxiety and depression, including Morphine (15 to 30 mg), Temazepam (7.5 mg), and Sertraline (25 mg).(iii)Also during this time, while Petitioner’s Mother was under Respondents’ and Jill’s undue influence, Respondent’s and Jill suggested the contents of the Purported Amendment, created the document, arranged for its execution and caused Petitioner’s Mother to execute the document by placing a pen in her hand and then physically moving her hand to scribe an “X” near the signature block. At the time, Petitioner’s Mother was wholly under the influence and control of Respondents and Jill and the document does not represent her free and voluntary act.(iv)At the time the Purported Amendment was allegedly executed, Petitioner’s Mother was 76 years old and infirm. She was on constant oxygen treatment and bed ridden suffering from extreme back pain. She was also suffering from anxiety, depression and poor vision. She was often confused and had memory problems. She was unable to read. She was totally dependent and submissive to the Respondents and Jill.(v)Respondents and Jill actively procured the Purported Amendment as part of a pattern of conduct aimed at wrongfully taking an unequal share of Petitioner’s Mother’s assets.(vi)Before, during and after execution of the Purported Amendment, Respondents and Jill took active steps to isolate Petitioner’s Mother from Petitioner and her other family members. Respondents and Jill were never very close to Petitioner. They formed an alliance. They acted to make Petitioner feel uncomfortable whenever she visited her mother. The never included her in the loop of current information concerning her mother’s health and treated her very much like a stranger. Just a couple of days after the purported Amendment was allegedly executed, Petitioner contacted Jessica to schedule a visit with her mother to celebrate her mother’s February 3, 2009 birthday. Jessica denied each request claiming simply, it would be best if she didn’t come.Over Jessica’s objections, Petitioner went to see her mother. Upon arrival she found that her mother couldn’t stay awake longer than 10 seconds. Her mother didn’t recognize anyone, was hallucinating—claiming that two children were sitting on her bed, and couldn’t complete a sentence, with one exception. She repeatedly complained about pain, asked for more medication and pleaded for someone to “put a pillow on her face” (to kill her). During that visit the same person that notarized the Purported Amendment arrived and was met by Margie.Together they met with Petitioner’s Mother. Margie instructed Petitioner’s Mother to sign an unknown document. Margie even went so far as to place the pen in her mother’s hand. Petitioner was present during this time. At this time the notary stated that because Petitioner’s mother was completely incoherent, the document could not be legally executed.(vi)The disposition of the Decedents’ estate as provided in the Purported Amendment confers an undue benefit on Respondents and Jill. The original trust and the first part of the Purported Amendment show that Petitioner’s Mother wanted her assets divided equally between her children. Respondents and Jill were trying to get an unequal share not only for themselves, but for Margie’s daughter as well.c.Third Ground: The Purported Amendment was allegedly executed by mistake, in that Petitioner’s Mother did not know or understand what was presented to her to sign. Indeed the document itself is extremely confusing as it partially reiterates Petitioner’s Mother’s desire that each of her children take an equal interest in her house. The subsequent language in that document conflicts with those wishes.d.Fourth Ground: Petitioner is informed and believes that Petitioner’s Mother did not have the required testamentary intent because she did not know what she was signing, and did not intend to create the Purported Amendment. Petitioner is informed and believes that her mother did not participate in the preparation of the Purported Amendment, did not know that the Purported Amendment was being prepared for her, and that Respondents and Jill caused the Purported Trust to be prepared.e.Fifth Ground: Petitioner is informed and believes that Petitioner’s Mother did not duly execute the Purported Amendment for the following reasons: 1.) in lieu of her signature, Petitioner’s mother allegedly marked an “X” in the signature block; 2.) Petitioner’s Mother’s name was not written next to the mark as required when a signature is located near the mark; 3.) the mark was not witnessed by two people who subscribed their own names on the document; 4.) Petitioner’s Mother’s name was not written next to the mark in the notary’s journal; 5.) the only witness in the notary journal has a financial interest in the Purported Amendment; 6.) the notarized document does not contain the required notary statement.7.By virtue of Respondent’s and Jill’s exertion of undue influence over Petitioner’s Mother and other wrongful acts, Respondents while acting in their capacity as Co-Trustees are recognizing and attempting to administer the Purported Amendment.
By virtue of Respondent’s and Jill’s exertion of undue influence over Petitioner’s Mother and other wrongful acts, Respondents while acting in their capacity as Co-Trustees are recognizing and attempting to administer the Purported Amendment.8.Respondents provided Petitioner with a copy of the Purported Amendment on April 1, 2009. Respondents have not served a notice under Probate Code §16061.7.
Respondents provided Petitioner with a copy of the Purported Amendment on April 1, 2009. Respondents have not served a notice under Probate Code §16061.7.SUSPEND AND REMOVE CO-TRUSTEES
9.The trust instrument does not appoint a successor trustee. Petitioner requests that the court appoint JANE DOE and OLIVIA CHRISTINA WYATT as successor co-trustees. JANE DOE and OLIVIA CHRISTINA WYATT 's consent to serve is attached as EXIBIT C. Petitioner further requests that the court appoint the successor trustees without bond.
The trust instrument does not appoint a successor trustee. Petitioner requests that the court appoint JANE DOE and OLIVIA CHRISTINA WYATT as successor co-trustees. JANE DOE and OLIVIA CHRISTINA WYATT 's consent to serve is attached as EXIBIT C. Petitioner further requests that the court appoint the successor trustees without bond.10.Petitioner believes that JANE DOE and OLIVIA CHRISTINA WYATT 's appointment as successor co-trustees is in the best interests of the trust and of those persons interested in the trust estate for the following reasons:
Petitioner believes that JANE DOE and OLIVIA CHRISTINA WYATT 's appointment as successor co-trustees is in the best interests of the trust and of those persons interested in the trust estate for the following reasons: a. Successor co-trustees have maintained the best contact with the other beneficiaries.b. Successor co-trustees will act in the best interests of all beneficiaries. PROVIDE ACCOUNTING
11.To date, Respondent Co-Trustees have never provided petitioner with an account of the Trust. Petitioner requests that the court order SIBLING BENEFICIARY NAMED AS CO-TRUSTEE and SIBLING RESPONDENT TO TRUST LITIGATION to file an accounting with the court detailing their acts as co-trustees.
To date, Respondent Co-Trustees have never provided petitioner with an account of the Trust. Petitioner requests that the court order SIBLING BENEFICIARY NAMED AS CO-TRUSTEE and SIBLING RESPONDENT TO TRUST LITIGATION to file an accounting with the court detailing their acts as co-trustees.BREACH OF TRUST
12.Respondent Co-Trustees are in breach of their trust in that co-trustees violated their duties to administer the trust in accordance with its terms and to exercise reasonable skill, care, and diligence in the administration of the trust by reason of their conduct alleged herein, including but not limited to, conspiring to create the alleged Purported Amendment, failing to make distributions required under the trust instrument in a timely manner and failing to provide an accounting.
Respondent Co-Trustees are in breach of their trust in that co-trustees violated their duties to administer the trust in accordance with its terms and to exercise reasonable skill, care, and diligence in the administration of the trust by reason of their conduct alleged herein, including but not limited to, conspiring to create the alleged Purported Amendment, failing to make distributions required under the trust instrument in a timely manner and failing to provide an accounting.13.The reasonably ascertainable names and addresses of the persons entitled to notice of this petition are as follows:
The reasonably ascertainable names and addresses of the persons entitled to notice of this petition are as follows:14.No request for special notice has been filed in this proceeding.
No request for special notice has been filed in this proceeding.WHEREFORE, Petitioner prays for an order of the Court:1.Finding the Purported Trust Amendment invalid due to the mental incapacity of Petitioner’s Mother;
Finding the Purported Trust Amendment invalid due to the mental incapacity of Petitioner’s Mother;2.Finding the Purported Trust Amendment invalid due to the undue influence of Respondents and others;
Finding the Purported Trust Amendment invalid due to the undue influence of Respondents and others;3.Purported Trust Amendment invalid due to mistake;
Purported Trust Amendment invalid due to mistake;4.Purported Trust Amendment invalid because it was not duly executed as required under the terms of the trust;
Purported Trust Amendment invalid because it was not duly executed as required under the terms of the trust;5.The court remove SIBLING BENEFICIARY NAMED AS CO-TRUSTEE and SIBLING RESPONDENT TO TRUST LITIGATION as co-trustees of the YOUR MOTHER’S Living Trust and appoint petitioner JANE DOE and OLIVIA CHRISTINA WYATT as successor co-trustees to serve without bond.
The court remove SIBLING BENEFICIARY NAMED AS CO-TRUSTEE and SIBLING RESPONDENT TO TRUST LITIGATION as co-trustees of the YOUR MOTHER’S Living Trust and appoint petitioner JANE DOE and OLIVIA CHRISTINA WYATT as successor co-trustees to serve without bond.6.The court order SIBLING BENEFICIARY NAMED AS CO-TRUSTEE and SIBLING RESPONDENT TO TRUST LITIGATION to file an accounting with the court detailing their acts as trustee.
The court order SIBLING BENEFICIARY NAMED AS CO-TRUSTEE and SIBLING RESPONDENT TO TRUST LITIGATION to file an accounting with the court detailing their acts as trustee.7.For $355.00 in court filing costs for filing this petition.
For $355.00 in court filing costs for filing this petition.8.For $750 in legal document assistant fees incurred to help prepare this motion.
For $750 in legal document assistant fees incurred to help prepare this motion.9.For attorneys fees and costs herein incurred by Petitioner in 2009 in researching, preparing and drafting this petition; and
For attorneys fees and costs herein incurred by Petitioner in 2009 in researching, preparing and drafting this petition; and10. For Instructions on how to proceed in this matter.
For Instructions on how to proceed in this matter.11. For such other orders as the Court may deem proper.
For such other orders as the Court may deem proper.RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:DATED: ____________, 2010__________________________
__________________________JANE DOE, Petitioner, In Pro Perwww.legalnoodle.comVERIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
I have read the foregoing PETITION TO DETERMINE VALIDITY OF PURPORTED TRUST AMENDMENT and know its contents.I am a party to this action. The matters stated in the foregoing document are true of my own knowledge except as to those matters which are stated on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe them to be true.I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.Executed on ___________ ___, 2010, at Los Angeles, California._______________________________JANE DOE, Declarant PROOF OF SERVICE
1013A (3) CCP Revised 5/1/05
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
I am employed in the county of Los Angeles, State of California.
I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action; my business address is www.legalnoodle.com, 322 Culver Blvd., #144, Playa del Rey, CA 90293.
On , I served the foregoing document described as:
on the parties in this action
[X] by placing a true copy thereof enclosed in sealed envelopes addressed as follows:
BY MAIL
[X]I deposited such envelope in the mail at Los Angeles, California.
I deposited such envelope in the mail at Los Angeles, California.The envelope was mailed with postage thereon fully prepaid.Executed on , at Los Angeles, California.
[X] (State) I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above is true and correct.
Dean McAdams
Type or Print NameSignature
Signature