Drake

Drake v. Pinkham

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 21, 2013C068747California3,184 words

Opinion

Opinion

Filed 5/28/13: pub. order 6/21/13 (see end of opn.)

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT

(El Dorado)

ROSINA JEANNE DRAKE, C068747

Plaintiff and Appellant, (Super. Ct. No. PP20050111)

v.

JANICE MARIE PINKHAM, as Trustee, etc., et al.,

Defendants and Respondents.

Plaintiff Rosina Jeanne Drake (Gina) appeals from a summary judgment entered in favor of defendants Janice and Daniel Pinkham, Gina‟s sister and brother-in-law, on Gina‟s petition to invalidate two amendments to a revocable trust (Prob. Code, § 17200)1, for a declaration that defendants predeceased the decedent (§ 259, subd. (a)), for imposition of a constructive trust, and for damages. The trial court found that six of the eight causes of action alleged in the petition are barred by the applicable statutes of limitation, and the remaining causes of action are barred by principles of collateral estoppel. The trial court did not reach the issue of laches. Gina appeals, contending

Further undesignated statutory references are to the Probate Code.

1 defendants “failed to meet their burden of…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.