January 2019

VOLUME 14 | NUMBER 1 | JANUARY 2019

	IN THIS ISSUE
Upcoming Events		>
Save the Date		>
Court News		>
Practitioner's Notes		>
Recent Cases		>
The Trusts and Estates eBulletin is published monthly by the Trusts and Estates Law Section, coeditors: Jana G. Garrotto Lewitt Hackman Jgarrotto@lewitthackman.com Stefanie S. Cutler Ruttenberg Cutler, LLP scutler@ruttenbergcutler.com Jessica G. Gordon Thompson Coburn LLP jgordon@thompsoncoburn.com Trusts and Estates Executive Committee Officers: Marc L. Sallus, Esq, Chair Stefanie S. Cutler, Vice-Chair Jana G. Garrotto, Secretary & Treasurer Julia L. Birkel, Esq, Immediate Past Chair

	Upcoming Events

Solving the Mysteries of Accounting and Getting Your Fees Approved Date: February 7, 2019 Time: 12:30-1:30 p.m. Location: LACBA The presenters will focus on the format and content requirements and distinctions between a report and accounting. In addition, they will discuss objections to a report or accounting. Lastly, the panel will discuss approval of attorney’s fees and costs. Speakers: Hon. Mary Thornton House (Ret), ARC Sarah Broomer, Hinojosa & Forer, LLP Virginia Sharpe, Los Angeles County Superior Court Click here for more information and to register Brown Bag Legislative Updates and Recent Court Decisions Date: February 19, 2019 Time: 12:30-1:30 p.m. Location: Los Angeles Superior Court More information to come.

	Save the Date

Brown Bag Elder Abuse Restraining Orders Date: March 5, 2019 More information to come.

We'd like to thank The Sanborn Team for their sponsorship of our events.

	Court News

Please click here for additional information as to the Annual Compliance Certification for Appointed Counsel Panel. Note that as of January 2019, The LASC is no longer using the term Probate Volunteer Panel or abbreviation PVP. Instead consistent with how counsel appointed in Probate cases are referred to statewide, the Court shall refer to the panel as the Appointed Counsel panel.

	Practitioner's Notes

Do’s and Don’ts for Nunc Pro Tunc Orders • Ex Parte Applications for Nunc Pro Tunc Orders are drop-off ex partes; • Use the local form from the LASC website; • May not be used to seek new relief; • No Declaration of Urgency is Needed; Practice Tips regarding Electronic Exhibit Tabs The following practice tip with regard to electronic tab exhibits is advised to significantly ease the burden of our Probate and Research attorneys, as well as judges, in reviewing motions and petitions. While it is understood that it is something additional to have to think about, in terms of advocacy it will likely be very effective. Think of filing a huge pleading in paper form without exhibit tabs and you realize what it could mean. California Rules of Court Rule, Rule 3.1110(f)(4) sets forth the requirements to electronically tab exhibits in motions: Rule 3.1110(f)(4): “Electronic exhibits must meet the requirements in rule 2.256(b). Unless they are submitted by a self-represented party, electronic exhibits must include electronic bookmarks with links to the first page of each exhibit and with bookmark titles that identify the exhibit number or letter and briefly describe the exhibit.” Attention Los Angeles County EFilers: The new electronic order system that the Los Angeles Superior Court implemented for processing of proposed orders requires that the filer enter their email address in the service contacts field in order for the Court to provide the filer with an emailed copy of the final order. If your service contact is not included in the service contacts field at the time you submit your filing, the Court will not be able to serve a copy of the order electronically through this system.

	Recent Cases

Civil Procedure When service is being effected by publication, publication in the newspaper named by the court is essential. A judgment is void if a plaintiff failed to properly publish the summons. Calvert v. Binali - filed Dec. 4, 2018, Second District, Div. Eight Cite as 2018 S.O.S. 5784 Full text click here > The safe harbor provision from Code of Civil Procedure Sec. 128.7(c)(1) applies to a former Sec. 128.5 sanctions motion. CPF Vaseo Associates, LLC v. Gray - filed Dec. 6, 2018, Fourth District, Div. One Cite as 2018 S.O.S. 5796 Full text click here> Constitutional Law Montana's restructuring of the formula for calculating the rate at which state-approved agency franchise stores could purchase liquor from the state did not violate the Contracts Clause because the state did not eliminate the stores' remedy for breach of its contract with the state. LL Liquor, Inc. v. State of Montana - filed Dec. 28, 2018 Cite as 2018 S.O.S. 17-35405 Full text click here > Evidence Law Disqualification of counsel is not an appropriate remedy for a violation of the attorney-client privilege if the violation resulted in no actual disclosure of relevant information likely be used advantageously against an adverse party during the course of the litigation. City of San Diego v. Superior Court (Hoover) - filed Dec. 19, 2018, Fourth District, Div. One Cite as 2018 S.O.S. 6052 Full text click here> Family Law Where the parties' spousal support settlement agreement reflected an understanding that the wife's recent earnings history included a pattern of increases, future increases consistent with this pattern would not amount to changed circumstances sufficient to justify a modification of spousal support, but a dramatic one-year leap in earnings constitutes a material change in circumstances such that a court could consider modification of her spousal support obligations. A trial court abused its discretion in fashioning a modification that failed to incorporate the parties' demonstrated understanding that the wife would have not insignificant increases in her earnings. In re Marriage of T.C. and D.C. - filed Dec. 18, 2018, Fourth District, Div. One Cite as 2018 S.O.S. 6057 Full text click here > Before courts and agencies can exert jurisdiction under Welfare and Institutions Code Sec. 300(b), there must be evidence indicating that the child is exposed to a substantial risk of serious physical harm or illness. A court's failure to make the requisite findings on these issues requires reversal. In re Israel T - filed Nov. 21, 2018, publication ordered Dec. 13, 2018, Second District, Div. Four Cite as 2018 S.O.S. 5932 Full text click here > A trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a party's request for lifetime renewal of a restraining order based on the facts underlying issuance of the original order. The doctrine of collateral estoppel did not prevent the restrained party from denying the facts underlying the original order. In re Marriage of Martindale & Ochoa - filed Dec. 7, 2018, publication ordered Dec. 13, 2018, First District, Div. Five Cite as 2018 S.O.S. 5935 Full text click here > The Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act requires that a parent receive notice and an opportunity to be heard before a child custody determination is made. If notice of a foreign proceeding is not given to a parent in a manner reasonably calculated to give actual notice, the foreign court does not have jurisdiction in conformity with UCCJEA standards. W.M. v. V.A. - filed Dec. 13, 2018, Second District, Div. Eight Cite as 2018 S.O.S. 5939 Full text click here > Probate Law The definition of "transferee" as kindred in Probate Code Sec. 21110(c) applies to Sec. 21110, but the more general definition of "transferee" applies in Sec. 21111(b). Estate of Stockird - filed Dec. 19, 2018, First District, Div. One Cite as 2018 S.O.S. 6129 Full text click here > Professional Licensing Up until July 1, 2020, a licensing board may deny or restrict a license based on the conduct underlying a dismissed conviction only when the conduct independently qualifies as a basis for denying a license. Moustafa v. Board of Registered Nursing - filed Dec. 10, 2018, First District, Div. One Cite as 2018 S.O.S. 5834 Full text click here > Professional Responsibility Where there is substantial evidence supporting the factual determination that the client made an informed decision to agree to a law firm's concurrent representation of themselves as well as another client with potentially adverse interests, no authority precludes a court from denying a subsequent motion to disqualify that attorney based on implied consent or holds that the absence of a written confirmation of that consent is dispositive. Antelope Valley Groundwater Cases - filed Dec. 20, 2018, Fifth District Cite as 2018 S.O.S. 6133 Full text click here > Real Property In an unlawful detainer action brought by a landowner who has newly acquired title to the property under a power of sale contained in a deed of trust, the landowner must perfect the title before it can serve a three-day written notice to quit on the possessor of the property. Dr. Leevill, LLC v. Westlake Health Care Center - filed Dec. 17, 2018 Cite as 2018 S.O.S. 5945 Full text click here> Tax Law A county tax board's unexplained rejection of a property owner's evidence of a decline in value for the property, with knowledge that the assessor's valuation analysis would result in a valuation significantly lower than the enrolled value, was arbitrary, as was its decision to leave in place an enrolled value that had been repudiated by the assessor and was unsupported by any evidence. Next Century Associates v. County of Los Angeles - filed Nov. 30, 2018, Second District, Div. One Cite as 2018 S.O.S. 5717 Full text click here > Granting a co-tenant a life estate in a tenancy-in-common interest is a "change in ownership" for property tax purposes. Durante v. County of Santa Clara - filed Nov. 30, 2018, Sixth District Cite as 2018 S.O.S. 5722 Full text click here > The definition of "transferee" as kindred in Probate Code Sec. 21110(c) applies to Sec. 21110, but the more general definition of "transferee" applies in Sec. 21111(b). Estate of Stockird - filed Dec. 19, 2018, First District, Div. One Cite as 2018 S.O.S. 6129 Full text click here > Trusts Even though a decedent's estate is the named defendant in actions under Probate Code Sec. 550 through Sec. 555, it is not a party under Code of Civil Procedure Sec. 998 that must pay specified costs after rejecting a reasonable settlement offer. Meleski v. Estate of Hotlen - filed Nov. 29, 2018, Third District Cite as 2018 S.O.S. 5633 Full text click here >

You are subscribed to %%list.name%% as %%emailaddr%% .

You are receiving this message because you are a member of the Los Angeles County Bar Association (LACBA) or one of its sections, have registered to receive correspondence through LACBA's website, or are a member of the legal profession. If you wish to be excluded from any future correspondence, please see instructions below or mail us at 1055 West 7th Street, Suite 2700, Los Angeles, CA 90017-2557.

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, click the following url, %%url.unsub%% or copy and paste the following url into your browser %%url.unsub%%