A Heggstad petition is a legal remedy used when property intended to be part of a trust was never formally transferred into the trust during the grantor’s lifetime. This guide explains how a Heggstad petition can resolve funding oversights for trusts in Bethel Island and Contra Costa County, why it matters for estate planning clients, and what steps are typically involved. The Law Offices of Robert P. Bergman provides focused estate planning services, serving San Jose and surrounding communities, and can help evaluate whether a Heggstad petition is appropriate for a particular property or situation.
Property left out of a trust can create uncertainty, delay distribution, and increase the cost of administration. A Heggstad petition asks the court to recognize property as part of the trust based on the grantor’s intent and supporting documents. This approach aims to reflect the estate plan the grantor intended and can avoid a lengthy probate proceeding when successful. For residents of Bethel Island and nearby areas, pursuing a Heggstad petition often begins with a careful review of deeds, trust documents, and contemporaneous evidence showing the grantor’s intent to fund the trust.
Filing a Heggstad petition can restore the intended asset structure of an estate plan without forcing property through the full probate process. By asking a court to declare that a specific asset was meant to be trust property, the petition can speed transfer, reduce administrative costs, and honor the grantor’s wishes. It can be particularly valuable when deeds were not properly recorded, titles were overlooked, or transfers were attempted but not finalized. Clients often find that a Heggstad petition provides a clearer, faster path to getting assets into the trust for distribution according to the trust’s terms.
The Law Offices of Robert P. Bergman focuses on estate planning matters for individuals and families across the Bay Area, including Bethel Island. Our practice handles a range of trust and probate issues, from document preparation and trust administration to petitions seeking court recognition of trust funding. Robert P. Bergman works directly with clients to review trust instruments, property records, and communications that support the grantor’s intent. We emphasize clear communication, practical solutions, and steady representation through each procedural step when pursuing a Heggstad petition or related estate planning remedy.
A Heggstad petition is a narrow legal tool used to demonstrate that a decedent intended certain property to be held in trust despite a lack of formal transfer. California courts evaluate evidence such as the trust document, deeds, correspondence, and actions taken by the grantor to determine intent. The petitioner must present persuasive documentation showing that the grantor treated the property as trust property or intended it to be so. This process is fact-driven and often depends on the clarity of documentation and the presence of consistent behavior by the grantor regarding the asset in question.
The procedural path for a Heggstad petition typically includes preparing the petition, filing it with the appropriate probate court, and providing notice to interested parties. The court conducts a hearing to review the evidence and determine whether the property should be characterized as part of the trust. Success hinges on establishing the grantor’s intent and the relationship between the asset and the trust terms. While not every case will result in relief, a well-documented factual record enhances the likelihood that a court will recognize the intended trust funding.
A Heggstad petition asks a probate court to declare that property was intended to be part of a trust despite formalities not being completed. The petition derives from a California case that recognized judicial authority to correct funding oversights when clear evidence of intent exists. Petitioners must compile documents and testimony showing the grantor’s plan for the property, including trust provisions, attempted transfers, and related communications. The remedy is aimed at honoring the grantor’s estate plan by placing assets into the trust’s estate administration stream without requiring full probate for those assets.
Successful Heggstad petitions depend on assembling coherent proof: the trust instrument itself, deeds or transfer documents, contemporaneous statements or correspondence, and conduct by the grantor reflecting the asset was treated as trust property. The process typically involves an initial factual review, drafting and filing the petition, serving interested parties, and a court hearing. The court examines whether the evidence demonstrates the grantor’s intent to fund the trust and may issue an order declaring the property part of the trust. Following the order, the trustee can manage or distribute the asset under the trust terms.
This glossary explains common terms you will encounter when considering a Heggstad petition so you can better understand the legal process and the documents involved. Familiarity with these terms helps when gathering evidence and discussing next steps with counsel. Entries cover the petition itself, related trust documents such as certification of trust and pour-over wills, and concepts such as trust funding and title issues. A clear grasp of these definitions will assist you in preparing the factual record necessary for the court to reach a favorable decision.
A Heggstad petition is a court filing that requests judicial recognition that particular property should be treated as trust property based on the decedent’s intention and supporting evidence. The petition typically identifies the asset, explains why it was not formally transferred, and presents documentation that shows the grantor intended the asset to belong to the trust. The court reviews deeds, trust language, testimony, and other records to determine whether to grant the petition. The order, if entered, permits the trustee to administer the property under the trust terms rather than through probate distribution.
A pour-over will is a testamentary document designed to transfer any assets not already in the trust into the trust at the grantor’s death. It complements a living trust by acting as a safety net for property that was not formally retitled. When a pour-over will is part of an estate plan, it directs that the residuary estate be transferred to the named trust and administered under its terms. For Heggstad petitions, a pour-over will can provide evidence of the grantor’s intent to funnel assets into the trust even when formal funding steps were incomplete.
Trust funding refers to the process of transferring title or ownership of assets into the name of the trust so they are governed by the trust document. Proper funding often requires deeds, account retitling, beneficiary designations, or beneficiary assignments to reflect the trust as the owner. Failure to complete these steps can leave property outside the trust, potentially creating the need for a Heggstad petition. Evidence of attempted funding or consistent intent to fund can be central to a court’s decision about whether to treat the asset as part of the trust.
A certification of trust is a summary document that provides essential information about a trust without revealing private details of the trust instrument. It typically includes the trust name, date, identity of the trustee, and confirmation that the trust is valid and in effect. Third parties may request this document to accept transactions on behalf of the trust. In Heggstad proceedings, a certification of trust may be used to verify the trust’s existence and the trustee’s authority while keeping the trust’s full terms confidential when possible.
When property intended for a trust remains outside that trust, there are several legal paths to consider. One option is to proceed with a Heggstad petition to have the court declare the asset part of the trust based on evidence of intent. Another path may involve formal probate administration, which can be longer and more costly. In some instances parties negotiate transfers or corrective deeds with successor trustees or beneficiaries. Choosing the right approach depends on the facts, the strength of documentation, timelines, and the parties involved, and each option carries different practical implications.
A limited approach can be effective when there is strong, contemporaneous written evidence showing the grantor intended the asset to be part of the trust. Examples include a deed referencing the trust, a trust provision naming the asset, or correspondence between the grantor and their attorney discussing the transfer. When documentation is straightforward and consistent, a focused petition or negotiated transfer may resolve the funding issue without extensive litigation. The clearer the record, the more narrowly tailored the remedy can be, potentially saving time and expense for beneficiaries and trustees.
A limited approach is often successful when beneficiaries and other interested parties are cooperative and willing to accept corrective documents or stipulate to a petition. If heirs, current title holders, and the trustee agree about the grantor’s intent, parties can often execute corrective deeds or file a streamlined petition with minimal dispute. Cooperation reduces the need for contested hearings and can accelerate the process of getting property administered according to the trust. When stakeholders align, the transaction is handled more efficiently and with fewer procedural hurdles.
A comprehensive approach becomes necessary when intent is disputed or the available evidence is conflicting or ambiguous. In those cases, a full litigation posture may be required to gather testimony, depose witnesses, and present a cohesive case to the court. The petitioner must often prepare for contested hearings that explore the circumstances surrounding the alleged transfer, which can involve substantial factual development. A careful, comprehensive strategy helps ensure that all relevant evidence is located, evaluated, and presented persuasively in court.
Complex situations involving multiple properties, layered title issues, or assets with liens or encumbrances may require a broad legal approach. When title records are unclear or there are competing claims from creditors or co-owners, resolving funding questions can be legally and practically intricate. A comprehensive plan addresses title clearing, creditor notice, possible partition issues, and coordination with trustees and fiduciaries. This thorough process helps protect the trust’s interests and the rights of beneficiaries while resolving the underlying ownership concerns.
A comprehensive approach provides a full assessment of the legal, factual, and procedural dimensions of unfunded trust assets. By examining property records, trust instruments, communications, and potential claims, this approach reduces the risk of surprises later in administration. It also ensures that any court filing is supported by robust evidence and that interested parties are properly notified and considered. The result is a higher likelihood of a durable court order or negotiated resolution that reflects the grantor’s intent and minimizes future disputes among beneficiaries and creditors.
Comprehensive representation also addresses downstream administration tasks such as updating titles, recording corrective deeds, and implementing the court’s instructions with accuracy. This reduces administrative burdens on trustees and beneficiaries and helps avoid additional corrective actions later. A full-picture strategy anticipates potential challenges and proactively addresses them, which can preserve estate value and provide clearer, more predictable outcomes for all parties involved. It supports orderly trust administration and reduces the likelihood of protracted disputes after an order or settlement.
A major benefit of a comprehensive approach is thorough evidence gathering to support the factual basis for a Heggstad petition. This includes locating deeds, communications, account statements, and third-party corroboration that establish the grantor’s intent. When the court has access to a well-organized record, it is positioned to make a clear determination that aligns with the grantor’s estate plan. Solid documentation also reduces the risk of successful appeals or future challenges by creating a transparent trail of proof for the court’s consideration.
Another benefit is clear post-order implementation that ensures trust administration proceeds smoothly after a court decision. A comprehensive plan includes steps to record orders, update title records, prepare trustee certifications, and coordinate distributions consistent with the trust. Addressing these tasks promptly prevents administrative delays and reduces opportunities for future disputes. Clear implementation supports trustees in fulfilling their duties and provides beneficiaries with timely access to trust assets according to the terms established by the grantor.
Start collecting relevant documentation as soon as a funding oversight is discovered. Look for deeds, trust instruments, correspondence, transaction records, and any notes or communications that reflect the grantor’s intent. Early collection preserves evidence and can reveal helpful contemporaneous statements or actions. Well-organized files make it easier to craft a persuasive petition and reduce delays later in the process. If you are assisting a trustee or family member, creating a central repository for these documents will streamline the subsequent legal review and court filing.
Anticipate the administrative steps that follow a favorable order, such as recording the court’s decision, updating property titles, and preparing trustee certifications. Planning for these tasks ahead of the hearing saves time and ensures that assets can be administered promptly under the trust. Coordinate with title companies, county recorders, and financial institutions to confirm their documentation requirements. Preparing these details in advance helps the trustee implement the court’s order without unnecessary delay and supports a smoother transition of the asset into trust administration.
Consider a Heggstad petition when property that should be governed by a trust remains titled outside the trust and you want to avoid formal probate. This remedy aligns assets with the grantor’s estate plan and helps trustees carry out distribution instructions without initiating probate administration for each overlooked asset. It is particularly relevant for real estate, bank accounts, or other items that the grantor intended to flow through the trust. When timely pursued, the petition can facilitate efficient estate administration and reduce carrying costs for beneficiaries.
A Heggstad petition can also be worthwhile when clear evidence of intent exists but corrective deeds were not executed before death, or where a pour-over will alone would lead to probate. The petition offers a judicial pathway to reflect the grantor’s intentions while potentially saving time and expense. Families often choose this route to preserve privacy, avoid the public scrutiny of probate, and maintain continuity with the trust’s management plan. The decision to pursue the petition should follow a careful review of the factual record and consideration of all legal options.
Typical circumstances include deeds not retitled into the trust, bank or investment accounts left in the decedent’s name, or assets subject to conflicting records about ownership. Other scenarios involve attempted transfers that were not completed, gaps between estate planning documents and recorded title, or last-minute changes that were not executed before death. When these gaps arise, a Heggstad petition can bring the asset into the trust if sufficient evidence demonstrates the grantor’s intent, allowing the trustee to manage and distribute the asset according to the trust document.
Sometimes a deed was signed or intended to be recorded but was never filed with the county recorder, leaving real property in the grantor’s individual name. In such cases, a Heggstad petition can present the signed deed, related trust provisions, and supporting communications to show that the grantor intended the real property to be part of the trust. The petition asks the court to declare that the property should be administratively treated as trust property, which often simplifies title transfer and trust administration compared with a full probate proceeding.
Financial accounts that were intended to be retitled to a trust but were left in the grantor’s individual name at death can create administrative delays. A Heggstad petition can help demonstrate the grantor’s intent to include such accounts in the trust, using statements from the grantor, beneficiary designations, and correspondence with financial institutions as supporting evidence. Successfully placing accounts into the trust streamlines distribution and avoids individual probate administration where possible, allowing the trustee to handle assets according to the trust’s provisions.
When title records are inconsistent, or when property appears to be owned jointly but there is evidence the grantor intended sole trust ownership, disputes can arise. A Heggstad petition helps clarify ownership by presenting evidence of intent, prior transfers, and trust documentation. Courts weigh the totality of the record in deciding whether to recognize trust ownership. Resolving conflicting title issues through a petition provides formal recognition that aligns legal ownership with the grantor’s estate plan and reduces the risk of future conflicts among heirs or co-owners.
We represent clients in Bethel Island and nearby communities to address funding oversights and title questions through Heggstad petitions and related estate planning actions. Our approach begins with a careful document review to identify the strongest evidence of intent and determine the best procedural path. We coordinate with trustees, beneficiaries, and title professionals to move cases forward efficiently, whether pursuing a negotiated transfer or a court petition. Our goal is to secure a practical resolution that honors the grantor’s plan and reduces administrative burdens on the family.
Clients retain our firm because we provide focused attention to the facts of each estate planning matter and tailor our approach to the client’s needs. We begin by identifying and preserving critical documents, evaluating title records, and assessing likely outcomes under local probate practice. This factual-first method helps determine whether a Heggstad petition is the most appropriate path or whether alternative remedies may achieve the same result with less expense or delay. Clear communication about possible paths and realistic timelines is central to our service.
When litigation is necessary, we prepare a thorough factual presentation to support the petition, including witness statements and documentary evidence that collectively show the grantor’s intent. We coordinate with title companies, county recorders, and other professionals to ensure post-order implementation moves smoothly. Our approach emphasizes organization and practical results, seeking to minimize stress for families while moving the matter forward efficiently. We also explore negotiation where that may lead to a quicker resolution consistent with the trust’s terms.
Throughout the process we prioritize transparency about costs, timelines, and likely outcomes based on local probate court practices. We work to reduce administrative burdens on trustees and family members by handling filings, service of process, and coordination with third parties. Our goal is to obtain a clear, enforceable resolution that places the asset under trust administration when appropriate, so beneficiaries can receive distributions according to the decedent’s plan without unnecessary delay or expense.
Our process begins with an initial review of the trust, deeds, and any relevant communications to assess whether a Heggstad petition is appropriate. We then outline recommended next steps, whether that involves a negotiated transfer, drafting and filing a petition, or assembling evidentiary materials for a contested hearing. We explain timelines, costs, and notification requirements so trustees and family members understand what to expect. Our goal is to move matters forward efficiently while preserving the legal record needed to obtain a favorable court determination when possible.
The initial stage focuses on gathering and reviewing all documents related to the trust and the asset in question. This includes the trust instrument, deeds, bank and account records, communications, and any attempted transfer documents. We identify witnesses and third parties who may corroborate the grantor’s intent. This fact-finding phase determines the strength of the petition and helps select the optimal procedural route, whether that be a negotiated corrective deed, a streamlined uncontested petition, or a contested proceeding requiring deeper factual development.
During the first meeting we collect background information, review available documents, and ask targeted questions to build a timeline of events and actions taken by the grantor. We assess whether there are contemporaneous statements or behaviors that support a transfer into the trust. Identifying any missing records early allows us to seek them promptly from banks, title companies, and other sources. This preparation sets the foundation for a clear and well-supported petition or alternative remedy, and helps manage expectations about likely outcomes.
We work to locate and preserve critical evidence, including recorded and unrecorded deeds, account statements, correspondence with legal advisors, and any notes or emails indicating the grantor’s intent. Preservation may include requesting certified copies of records from county offices or financial institutions. Proper evidence collection improves the credibility of the petition and reduces arguments about lost or missing documentation. By establishing a comprehensive factual record early, we strengthen the client’s position and enable more efficient preparation for the filing or negotiation phase.
Once the factual record is compiled, we prepare the petition and supporting declarations, clearly explaining the basis for recognizing the asset as trust property. The filing includes a description of the asset, the trust provisions, and evidentiary exhibits that document the grantor’s intent. We also prepare required notices to heirs, beneficiaries, and other interested parties to ensure procedural compliance. Attention to procedural detail reduces the risk of delay and positions the matter for a timely hearing before the probate court.
Drafting involves setting out the legal and factual grounds for the petition in a clear, organized manner, and preparing declarations from witnesses or from the trustee that summarize the evidence. Exhibits are compiled and labeled for the court file to present a coherent narrative of the grantor’s intent. The paperwork must satisfy statutory and local court requirements to avoid procedural defects that could delay consideration. A well-presented petition helps the court focus on the merits of the factual showing rather than technical issues.
Proper service and notice are essential; we identify and notify all required parties, including beneficiaries, heirs, and known creditors as required by probate rules. Timely service allows interested parties to review the petition and either consent or raise objections, and it preserves the court’s jurisdiction to issue a binding order. Where appropriate, we seek stipulations or agreed orders to streamline the process, but when disputes arise we prepare to address objections through evidentiary responses and legal argument at the hearing.
At the hearing the court considers the petition, the evidence, and any objections from interested parties. The judge assesses whether the totality of the record demonstrates the decedent’s intent to include the asset in the trust. If the court grants the petition, it issues an order recognizing the asset as trust property. We then assist with implementation tasks such as recording the order, updating title records, and advising the trustee about managing or distributing the asset under the trust’s terms to ensure the court’s instructions are carried out correctly.
At the hearing we present the factual record, highlight key documents, and explain how the evidence supports the grantor’s intent to fund the trust. We respond to questions from the judge and address any objections raised by interested parties. The goal is to show the court a coherent narrative supported by documentary and testimonial proof that aligns with the trust’s terms. Clear presentation and thorough preparation increase the likelihood the court will find in favor of recognizing the asset as part of the trust.
After the court enters an order, we assist with the administrative steps required to reflect the decision in public records and institutional accounts. This may include recording the order with the county recorder, working with title companies to clear or update deeds, and preparing trustee certifications for banks and financial institutions. Completing these tasks promptly ensures the trustee can manage and distribute the asset according to the trust and helps avoid future disputes about ownership or authority to act on behalf of the trust.
A Heggstad petition is a probate filing that asks the court to recognize certain property as part of a trust when the formal transfer was not completed before the grantor’s death. It is used when there is evidence that the grantor intended the asset to be held in trust but title records or account registrations do not reflect that intent. The petition identifies the asset, explains the discrepancy, and presents supporting documents and testimony to show the grantor’s plan. The court evaluates the totality of the evidence to decide whether to treat the property as trust property. This remedy is particularly useful for real estate, accounts, or other assets that a trust instrument suggests should be included but were overlooked. The decision to file should follow a careful review of documents such as the trust instrument, deeds, communications, and any attempted transfer steps. Gathering clear evidence before filing increases the chance the court will grant the requested relief and align property ownership with the grantor’s estate plan.
The timeline for a Heggstad petition depends on the complexity of the factual record, the court’s schedule, and whether the matter is contested. An uncontested petition with strong documentary support may move through the court more quickly, while disputed matters require additional time for discovery, witness preparation, and hearings. The process can range from several weeks for straightforward filings to many months for contested cases. Local probate court calendars and procedural requirements also shape the timeline, so planning for variability is important. Early evidence collection and prompt service of notices to interested parties can reduce delays. Working proactively to address title issues, secure necessary documents from county or financial institutions, and engage with potential opponents about resolution can shorten the process. If the petition becomes contested, additional time may be required for depositions, subpoenas for records, and preparing witnesses for testimony, which extends the overall timeline for obtaining a court order.
Courts reviewing a Heggstad petition look for evidence that the decedent intended the asset to be part of the trust. Helpful evidence includes the trust instrument itself, deeds or attempted transfer documents, correspondence indicating intent, financial statements that show trust-related transactions, and testimony from witnesses who observed the grantor’s actions or heard their statements. The court weighs this documentation collectively to determine whether the recorded title fails to reflect the grantor’s true ownership intentions. Contemporaneous records and consistent behavior by the grantor often carry the most persuasive weight. For example, a deed referencing the trust, prior attempts to retitle accounts, or communications with attorneys or financial advisors about trust funding strengthen the record. The absence of documentation does not always preclude relief but makes the petition more difficult. A structured evidence-gathering effort improves the clarity of the narrative presented to the court.
Yes, heirs and other interested parties can contest a Heggstad petition. Any person with a potential interest in the property, including beneficiaries and successors, may file objections or raise competing claims. Contests often hinge on disputed facts about the grantor’s intent, the credibility of witnesses, or the interpretation of documents. When objections arise, the court may require additional evidence, take witness testimony, and evaluate conflicting accounts to determine the grantor’s true intent regarding the asset. Because contests can extend the timeline and increase costs, early communication with interested parties can sometimes reduce conflict. If parties are willing to negotiate, agreements or stipulated orders can resolve the matter without a contested hearing. When disputes persist, careful litigation preparation, thorough evidence collection, and clear presentation at hearing are necessary to address objections and persuade the court of the petition’s merits.
A successful Heggstad petition recognizes an asset as part of the trust, which can remove that asset from separate probate administration. However, it does not guarantee that all probate matters are avoided, and it depends on the asset and the broader estate context. For example, a petition that brings a specific property into the trust can prevent that property from passing through probate, but other unfunded assets may still require probate administration if not otherwise addressed by the estate plan. The petition’s goal is to align specific assets with the trust and thereby reduce the assets subject to probate. Where multiple assets are unfunded or where creditor claims exist, additional estate administration steps may be necessary. Each situation should be assessed individually to determine the potential for avoiding probate and to plan for any remaining administration that may be required.
The cost to file a Heggstad petition varies with the complexity of the case, the amount of time needed to gather evidence, and whether the matter is contested. Fees may include attorney time for document review and drafting, court filing fees, costs to obtain certified records, and service fees for notifying interested parties. Simple, uncontested petitions with readily available documentation are generally less expensive than contested matters that require discovery, depositions, and multiple court appearances. Discussing budget and likely costs early helps set expectations and identify potential ways to reduce expense, such as settling with parties or narrowing disputed issues. We provide transparent guidance about likely fee ranges and recommend efficient evidence-gathering strategies to manage costs while preserving the strength of the petition prepared for court.
After the court grants a Heggstad petition, the order formally recognizes the asset as trust property and clarifies the trustee’s authority to manage or distribute it under the trust terms. The trustee then takes steps to implement the order, such as recording the court’s decision with the county recorder for real property, updating account registrations, and preparing trustee certifications for financial institutions. These administrative actions ensure that the asset is treated consistently with the trust for all future transactions. Timely implementation reduces the risk of further disputes and allows beneficiaries to receive distributions according to the trust’s provisions. We assist trustees with these post-order tasks, coordinating with title companies, banks, and county offices to confirm what documentation they require. Completing these steps promptly helps finalize the resolution and integrates the asset into the trust’s administration efficiently.
A Heggstad petition can be used for financial accounts and investments as well as real property, provided there is convincing evidence the grantor intended those assets to be part of the trust. Documentation such as beneficiary designations, account statements, correspondence showing intent to retitle accounts, or instructions to advisors can support a petition for these assets. Each financial institution may have specific procedures for updating account ownership or recognizing court orders, so preparation for post-order implementation is important. Because institutions often require particular documentation to transfer or retitle accounts, we coordinate with them early in the process to identify requirements and ensure the petition and subsequent court order meet their needs. This helps avoid delays in accessing or transferring funds after the court has recognized the asset as trust property.
Notice requirements vary by jurisdiction and the nature of the petition, but in general interested parties such as beneficiaries and heirs must be notified of a Heggstad petition so they have an opportunity to respond. Proper notice preserves the court’s jurisdiction and ensures the process is fair to all potentially affected parties. Failure to provide required notice can lead to procedural challenges or delay, so identifying and notifying the correct parties is a critical part of the filing process. We help identify the individuals and entities who must be served and prepare the required notices in compliance with probate rules. When possible, early communication can foster agreement and reduce the risk of contested hearings. Where disputes are likely, proper service protects the integrity of the proceeding and supports a binding court decision once the matter is resolved.
Alternatives to filing a Heggstad petition include negotiating corrective deeds or transfers with current title holders, relying on a pour-over will followed by probate administration, or pursuing other equitable remedies depending on the facts. When parties are cooperative, executing a corrective deed or account retitling may achieve the same outcome more quickly and with less expense than litigation. However, where cooperation is lacking or title issues are complex, a court petition may be the most reliable method to achieve a final, enforceable resolution. Choosing among alternatives requires evaluating the strength of the evidence, the position of interested parties, and the urgency of resolving administration matters. We review those factors with clients to recommend the most appropriate path, balancing costs and timelines with the likelihood of obtaining the desired outcome without unnecessary delay.
Criminal Defense
Homicide Defense
Manslaughter
Assault and Battery
Assault with a Deadly Weapon
Battery Causing Great Bodily Injury
Domestic Violence
Domestic Violence Protection Orders
Domestic Violence Restraining Order
Arson Defense
Weapons Charges
Illegal Firearm Possessions
Civil Harassment
Civil Harassment Restraining Orders
School Violence Restraining Orders
Violent Crimes Defense
Estate Planning Practice Areas