Colburn

Colburn v. Northern Trust Co.

Bad Law
151 Cal. App. 4th 439·59 Cal. Rptr. 3d 828
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 4, 2007B185956California4,550 words

Opinion

Opinion

Vogel, J.

By a carefully drafted no contest clause in his trust, Richard D. Colburn’s testamentary plan compelled a forced election by his former wife and their children—either enforce their rights under an existing marital dissolution judgment by filing creditor’s claims, or relinquish those rights and take the gifts provided for them in his trust instruments. The former wife and children filed “safe harbor” petitions (Prob. Code, § 21320) in pursuit of an order eliminating the election and allowing them to reap the benefits of both the marital dissolution judgment and the gifts under the trust. The trustees opposed both petitions. The trial court found that creditor’s claims (a prerequisite to enforcement of the marital judgment) would violate the no contest clause, but that an order to Show cause for modification of the child support due under the marital judgment would not. Both sides appeal, the former wife and children in search of an order that would allow them to have their cake and eat it too, the trustees in search of consistency. We agree with the trial court that creditor’s claims would violate the no contest clause but disagree with the trial court’s finding that an…

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.