Halimi

Halimi v. Grant CA2/8

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 2, 2013B240730California2,930 words

Opinion

Opinion

Grimes, J.

BACKGROUND

1. The Trust Action Pursuant to the 2005 amendment to her trust, Grant’s mother designated Grant as the sole beneficiary. In 2006, Linda Goldman-Ofer (Ofer), Grant’s sister, induced their elderly and mentally incompetent mother to amend the trust to designate both Grant and Ofer as beneficiaries, in equal shares as to the personal trust assets. Grant retained Halimi to represent him in a challenge to the 2006 amendment. Halimi filed a petition to invalidate that amendment more than 120 days after Ofer had given a trustee’s notification. The probate court sustained Ofer’s demurrer to the petition on the ground it was not timely and granted leave to amend. The amended petition merely alleged the challenge to the 2006 trust amendment had been filed within the requisite 120 days, which was incorrect. Ofer moved for summary judgment on the ground the petition was untimely. The motion was scheduled to be heard about a month after mediation. During mediation, Grant and Ofer entered into a settlement agreement whereby Ofer would receive a total of $531,365.88 of the trust’s personal assets and Grant would receive only $653,483.69, or 60 percent of the personal assets in…

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.