Kane

In this case we hold an appeal from an order made pursuant to Probate Code section 7241, subdivision (b) for the purpose of preventing injury or loss to a person or property, does not stay enforcement of the order. Thus, while such an order may be appealable (Estate of Hammer (1993) 19 Cal.App.4th 1621, 1626, fn. 1 [ 24 Cal.Rptr.2d 190 ]), the order must nevertheless be carried out as if no appeal were pending. (Prob. Code, § 7241, subd. (b).)

In this case the trial court made a finding pursuant to section 7241, subdivision (b) real party in interest would suffer irreparable loss if she did not receive vials of decedent’s frozen sperm to which she was entitled under the terms of his will as well as under a settlement agreement entered into by the parties. Thus, on March 23,1995, the trial court issued an order directing the administrator of the estate to distribute the vials to real party in interest forthwith. We conclude petitioners’ subsequent appeal of that ruling did not stay enforcement of the order. Therefore we further conclude it was unnecessary for the trial court to require petitioners to post an undertaking as a condition of staying the March 23, 1995, order.…