Rands

Rands v. Rands

Good Law
100 Cal. Rptr. 3d 632·178 Cal. App. 4th 907·2009 Cal. App. LEXIS 1720
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 30, 2009B208062California1,981 words

Opinion

Opinion

Gilbert, J.

A trust provides that a settlor’s incapacity may be established by two physicians’ certifications that the person is mentally incapacitated. Revocation of incapacity may be established by two other physicians’ certifications that the person is no longer incapacitated.

Two of settlor’s treating physicians certify that he is mentally incompetent. A year later, two other physicians certify that he is mentally competent.

Here we conclude the certifications of mental competence are insufficient because neither physician who found mental competence was aware of the earlier certifications of mental incompetence.

William Rands appeals an order of the probate court determining that his revocation of trust is ineffective due to his lack of capacity. We affirm.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

William Rands and Elizabeth S. Rands married on August 26, 1978. Each had children from previous marriages, but they did not have children together. At times during the marriage, conflict and rancor existed between each side of the family.

On May 7, 1996, William and Elizabeth settled and executed the Rands Family Trust and, later, an amendment to the trust (Trust). The Trust contained…

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.