Weinberger

Weinberger v. Morris

Good Law
115 Cal. Rptr. 3d 860·188 Cal. App. 4th 1016·2010 Cal. App. LEXIS 1668
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 24, 2010B215819California2,204 words

Opinion

Opinion

Bigelow, J.

This appeal is taken from a final order determining the construction of a trust instrument. (Prob. Code, §§ 1304, 17200.) We affirm the order.

FACTS

The Tmst Background

Sue Weinberger (Mrs. Weinberger) was bom in 1911. During her lifetime, Mrs. Weinberger had two children, Sheila Weinberger and Robert Weinberger, and acquired a parcel of real property located on Atoll Avenue in North Hollywood. At all times relevant to the current case, Lee Davis was Sheila’s fiance.

On October 12, 1996, Mrs. Weinberger executed a declaration of tmst creating the “Sue Weinberger Tmst” (the Trust). On the same date, Mrs. Weinberger executed a quitclaim deed transferring her Atoll Avenue property to the Tmst. The quitclaim deed to the Tmst was recorded on October 31, 1996.

The Trust Instrument’s Language

Article 1.1 of the Tmst instmment provided that Mrs. Weinberger was the initial tmstee, and Sheila was the successor tmstee, followed by Davis and then David Sarazen.

Article 2.1 of the Tmst instmment gave the tmstee the power to dispose of all assets in the tmst without court approval. It granted the tmstee “full power, authority, and discretion . . . . fit] . . . [t]o hold,…

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.