Sefton

Plaintiff Thomas W. Sefton, Jr. (Thomas Jr.), appeals a judgment awarding him $565,350, plus interest, from the estate of his grandfather, Joseph W. Sefton, Jr. (Grandfather). The probate court, interpreting our prior opinion in this matter (Sefton v. Sefton (2012) 206 Cal.App.4th 875 [ 142 Cal.Rptr.3d 174 ] (Sefton I)), determined this sum to be the “ ‘substantial’ share” of Grandfather’s estate to which Thomas Jr. was entitled. (See id. at p. 895.) Thomas Jr. contends the probate court misinterpreted Sefton I and therefore improperly limited his award from Grandfather’s estate.

We conclude the probate court’s interpretation of Sefton /, while reasonable, was in error. The “ ‘substantial’ share” determined by the probate court is not the correct measure of Thomas Jr.’s award from Grandfather’s estate under the facts of this case. We do not fault the probate court for this error. As we will explain, portions of Sefton /, and in particular the sentence directing the probate court on remand, are ambiguous in their meaning. In this opinion, we resolve the ambiguity and clarify the award to which Thomas Jr. is entitled.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

The relevant facts are largely…