Hume

I

We publish this case to make explicit what is otherwise implicit in the statute dealing with objections to inventories and appraisals in conservator-ship proceedings (Prob. Code, § 2614) 1 —namely that the burden of proof is on the objector to the inventory and appraisal, not on the conservator.

*1388 The facts are simple: The Orange County Public Guardian was appointed conservator of Laura Snow Auston Hume sometime prior to June 2004. In June 2004 the public guardian filed a final inventory and appraisal of Laura’s estate. One of her children, William Snow Hume, filed objections. 2 A hearing was held, and the trial court entered an order overruling the objections and “accepting]” the inventory and appraisal “as is.” William Snow Hume then filed this appeal. 3 His primary contention is that the trial court erred in placing the burden of proof on him to show that the various appraisals contained in the inventory were erroneous, rather than placing the burden of proof on the conservator to show the validity of, in his words, the “contested valuations” in the inventory. 4

The burden of proof is to law what inertia is to physics—a built-in bias in favor of the status…