In Re Estate of Carter

Good Law
111 Cal. App. 4th 1139·4 Cal. Rptr. 3d 490
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 3, 2003G031676California6,587 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sills, J.

I. Introduction

The trial court vacated an order for final distribution of an estate when two women came forward who might be “heirs” (here, the daughters) of the decedent, as “heir” is defined under the laws of intestate succession. The two women had not received notice of the administration of the intestate estate from the petitioner for administration, the brother of the decedent. The two women had been bom out of wedlock, and the petitioner for administration had concluded that they did not qualify as heirs, and were therefore not entitled to personal notice under Probate Code section 8110. The statute provides in pertinent part: “At least 15 days before the hearing of a petition for administration of a decedent’s estate, the petitioner shall serve notice of the hearing by mail or personal delivery on all of the following persons: [¶] (a) Each heir of the decedent, so far as known or reasonably ascertainable by the petitioner.” (Italics added.)

As we explain in detail below, though it was a close case, the trial court correctly set aside the final order of distribution. The moving papers supporting the set aside motion contained evidence which showed that the…

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.