Sefton

Sefton v. Sefton

Good Law
142 Cal. Rptr. 3d 174·2012 Cal. App. LEXIS 643·206 Cal. App. 4th 875·2012 WL 1948892
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 31, 2012No. D059211California7,840 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Nares, J.

*879 Opinion

In this case of first impression we are asked to interpret provisions of the California Powers of Appointment Act (CPAA), specifically Probate Code sections 652 and 601 (all further undesignated statutory references are to the Probate Code).

J.W. Sefton, Jr. (Grandfather), executed his will in 1955 (Grandfather’s Will). He later passed away in 1966, giving his son, Thomas W. Sefton (Father), a lifetime estate, with a portion of the remainder estate going to Father’s “then living issue,” identified in the will as his daughter, Laurie M. Sefton (Laurie) (here represented by Wells Fargo, N.A., as trustee), his son, Harley K. Sefton (Harley) (here represented by Harley K. Sefton as trustee of the Harley K. Sefton trust), and petitioner and appellant Thomas W. Sefton, Jr. (Thomas Jr.).

Under the common law existing at the time Grandfather executed his will and when he passed away, the language “then living issue” was considered as giving Father a “non-exclusive power of appointment,” meaning every one of Father’s children that survived him must a receive at least a “substantial” part of the remainder estate. However, prior to Father’s death, the Legislature enacted…

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.