Litigation involving trusts, probate, and the interpretation of wills often presents complex substantive and procedural issues. GMSR has successfully navigated these issues on appeal, obtaining a significant U.S. Supreme Court win regarding the scope of the “probate exception” to federal jurisdiction, a California Supreme Court win regarding a trustee’s attorney-client privilege, and numerous Court of Appeal wins involving breaches of fiduciary duty and the interpretation of wills.
Banks v. Pacific Homes Foundation (Mar. 18, 2010, E047364) 2010 WL 985369 [nonpublished opinion]
Charitable gift doctrine
Court of Appeal reverses probate court order refusing to enforce charitable testamentary gift
Banks v. Pacific Homes Foundation (2010) 2010 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 1942 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Five) [unpublished]. The petitioner, as successor trustee, sought a determination that a substantial gift to GMSR’s client, Pacific Homes Foundation, had lapsed and that the gift
Wright v. Santa Rosa Memorial Hospital (Dec. 17, 2009, A123721) 2009 WL 4882680 [nonpublished opinion]
Three siblings attempted to sue for the wrongful death of their sister, arguing that they became the sister’s heirs when their mother died after the sister. The Court of Appeal disagreed and affirmed the trial court’s ruling that the plaintiffs did not have standing to
In re Six Flags Claims Trust (July 2, 2008, B188321) 2008 WL 2600718 [nonpublished opinion]
Validity of beneficiary vote approving payment of trustee fees
In re James G. Stull Living Trust (Jan. 28, 2008, B197564) 2008 WL 217622 [nonpublished opinion]
In approving a trust accounting involving a settlor’s trust that divided into two subtrusts upon the settlor’s death—one for the benefit of his children and one for the benefit of their stepmother, the settlor’s surviving spouse—the trial court ruled that all trust administrative expenses must
Marshall v. Marshall (2006) 547 U.S. 293
Claims based on interference with an inter vivos trust do not fall within the “probate” exception to federal jurisdiction
Moeller v. Superior Court (1997) 16 Cal.4th 1124
Attorney-client privilege not binding on a successor trustee
Weinberg v. Parkinson’s Disease Foundation (Apr. 24, 1990, B040520)
Interpretation of ambiguous residuary bequest in will
Browse By Practice Area
Who We Serve
Whether on appeal, assisting trial counsel, or advising government officials contemplating legislative action, GMSR provides unique insight into the complex laws that impact public entities.
Where coverage may exist, GMSR represents insureds on appeal effectively and efficiently. Where it does not, the firm protects insurers’ right to deny claims.
GMSR offers corporate clients objective assessments on appeal, based on a deep understanding of the limitations and opportunities of appellate review.
The firm’s lawyers are team players, collaborating with trial counsel at any level from legal strategy to writing or editing trial court motions and appellate briefs.
GMSR vigorously advocates the rights of individual plaintiffs and defendants, in both state and federal appellate courts.
As part of GMSR’s long-standing commitment to social justice and equality, GMSR provides pro bono appellate services to individuals and to community organizations on issues of concern.
© 2024 Greines, Martin, Stein & Richland LLP.
All rights reserved. Disclaimer - Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
Los Angeles
6420 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1100
Los Angeles, California 90048
p: (310) 859 7811 | f: (310) 276 5261
San Francisco
50 California Street, Suite 1500
San Francisco, CA 94111
p: (415) 315 1774
We welcome your inquiry. However, sending us an email does not create an attorney-client relationship. For that reason, you should not send us any kind of confidential information. Until we have agreed to represent you, we cannot be obligated to keep it confidential.