Gallio v. Conigliaro

Caution
1995 Cal. App. LEXIS 283·33 Cal. App. 4th 592·39 Cal. Rptr. 2d 470·95 Daily Journal DAR 3936·95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2307
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 28, 1995B081175California1,698 words

Opinion

Opinion

Yegan, J.

Here we hold that the state constitutional right to privacy (Cal. Const., art. I, § 1) and newly enacted Family Code section 853, subdivision (a) preclude discovery of a living person’s will. Gloria Conigliaro and Joanne Pinherio (hereinafter the children) appeal from a judgment that the property of their deceased father, John Gallic, Jr. (father), was not transmuted to community property. The trial court ruled that the children could not compel the production of Helen M. Gallio’s (stepmother’s) will and testamentary documents to show an agreement between father and stepmother to transmute property. We affirm.

Father married stepmother in 1949. After the marriage the Gallios constructed a home on stepmother’s Santa Paula property. The construction was paid for with a loan and stepmother’s money. Over the next 40 years, the couple bought additional property, always taking title in joint tenancy.

In 1967 father executed a will providing that stepmother would receive a life estate in his property. The will stated that his children would share a one-half remainderman interest and that father’s stepson, Donald J. Richardson, Jr., would receive the remaining one-half…

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.