GERMINO

GERMINO v. Hillyer

Good Law
107 Cal. App. 4th 951·132 Cal. Rptr. 2d 478·2003 Cal. App. LEXIS 512·2003 Daily Journal DAR 3924·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3083
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 9, 2003F041268California2,134 words

Opinion

Opinion

Vartabedian, J.

This is an appeal from an order granting instructions to cotrustees; the order is appealable pursuant to Probate Code section 1304, subdivision (a). (All further statutory references are to the Probate Code unless otherwise specified.) We will hold that the trustees’ notice pursuant to section 16061.7 was adequate to commence the limitations period established by section 16061.8. The trial court was correct that this limitations period has expired; therefore we will affirm the order.

Facts and Procedural History

Decedent Vincent L. Hillyer created a living trust, nominally funded during his life but endowed by his pour-over will with a corpus of about $3 million upon his death in 1999. The trust instrument contained a no-contest clause. In a prior appeal (Hillyer v. Germino (June 18, 2001, F036004) [nonpub. opn.]) we considered whether a proposed petition by the present appellant, Darius P. Hillyer, would violate that clause. (See § 21320.) We held that, in large part, the proposed petition would violate the trust’s broad no-contest clause.

Remittitur issued from this court and jurisdiction vested again in the trial court on August 20, 2001.

On February 26, 2002,…

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.