If you are considering altering an existing trust in Torrance, understanding the trust modification petition process is important for protecting the trust creator’s intentions and beneficiaries’ rights. A trust modification petition is a legal filing that seeks court approval to change the terms of a trust when circumstances have changed, the language is ambiguous, or the settlor’s intent needs clarification. The Law Offices of Robert P. Bergman provides clear guidance on when a petition is appropriate, what evidence the court considers, and how to preserve estate planning objectives while navigating the local procedures in Los Angeles County and California courts.
Many families face unforeseen life events, changed tax rules, or drafting mistakes that make a trust modification petition necessary. Whether the change is prompted by a beneficiary’s changed needs, a settlor’s diminishing capacity, or an error that could defeat the trust’s purpose, a carefully prepared petition helps the court evaluate requests and protect all parties’ interests. Our firm explains litigation alternatives, the potential timeline, and the importance of accurate documentary support. We emphasize practical solutions that balance timely resolution with preserving the intent behind your estate plan for future generations.
A trust modification petition can restore clarity and functionality to a trust when unforeseen circumstances make the original terms impractical or unfair. It allows interested parties to seek a court-sanctioned change that aligns with the settlor’s intent and current realities, such as beneficiary needs, tax changes, or ambiguous drafting. When handled properly, the petition can prevent prolonged disputes, reduce administration complications, and ensure assets are managed as intended. The process also provides a formal record of the change, which helps trustees and beneficiaries act with confidence and reduces the risk of future litigation over the trust terms.
The Law Offices of Robert P. Bergman offers estate planning and trust-related representation for clients in Torrance, Los Angeles County, and throughout California. Our approach emphasizes clear communication, careful documentation, and practical strategies to resolve disputes and implement needed changes to trusts. We work with families to gather supporting evidence, prepare persuasive petitions, and coordinate with trustees and beneficiaries to seek solutions that protect the settlor’s intent and beneficiaries’ interests. Our goal is to guide you through the court process with measured legal advocacy and a focus on preserving family relationships where possible.
A trust modification petition is filed in probate or superior court to request a change to the terms of an existing trust. Grounds for modification can include mistake in the drafting, changed circumstances that frustrate the trust’s purpose, a need to correct ambiguity, or changes in law that affect trust administration. The court will examine the trust document, related communications, and any evidence showing the settlor’s intent. Petitioners should be prepared to explain why the modification is necessary, how it supports the settlor’s objectives, and how it affects beneficiaries, trustees, and ongoing administration of trust assets.
California law provides different mechanisms for trust modification depending on whether the settlor is alive, incapacitated, or deceased. When the settlor is alive but incapacitated, petitions often focus on clarifying intent or adjusting terms to reflect current needs. If the settlor has passed, interested parties may seek modification to correct mistakes or address unforeseen consequences. The court balances the need for change against the foundational principle that trusts should generally be enforced according to their terms, so strong documentation and persuasive legal reasoning are essential components of a successful petition.
A trust modification petition is a formal request filed with the probate or superior court asking for permission to alter one or more terms of an existing trust. This petition typically sets out the trust’s history, the reasons why modification is necessary, and proposed changes that align with the settlor’s intent or current circumstances. Courts consider whether the requested changes are consistent with the trust’s purpose and whether the modification fairly addresses the interests of beneficiaries and trustees. Proper preparation includes attaching the trust document, relevant correspondence, and evidence supporting the need for judicial intervention.
Successful trust modification petitions are grounded in a clear statement of reasons for the change, factual evidence demonstrating the need, and proposed modifications that are narrowly tailored to resolve the problem. The process usually begins with a careful review of the trust instrument and any related estate planning documents, followed by gathering affidavits, declarations, and documentary support. Petitioners must provide notice to interested parties and be prepared for mediation or hearing. Courts look for respect of the settlor’s intent, fairness to beneficiaries, and the long-term effect of any change on trust administration.
Understanding common terms helps demystify the trust modification process. This section defines words you will encounter during proceedings, explains how courts interpret intent and ambiguity, and clarifies roles such as settlor, trustee, and beneficiary. Clear definitions make it easier to assemble persuasive documentation and communicate effectively with the court and other interested parties. Familiarity with these terms also assists in evaluating whether a court is likely to grant a modification and what supporting evidence will carry weight in Los Angeles County courts.
The settlor is the person who originally created and funded the trust and established its terms. The settlor’s intent is central to decisions about trust construction and any proposed modifications. Courts interpreting a petition will look to the trust document itself, communications from the settlor, and surrounding circumstances to determine what the settlor intended. When a settlor is alive, their current wishes and capacity play a significant role. When a settlor has passed, historical evidence and the trust language guide the court’s determination of appropriate modifications.
A petition to modify a trust is a court filing that proposes specific changes to the trust’s terms and explains the legal and factual basis for those changes. The petition must identify interested parties, include the trust document, and present evidence supporting the need for modification. Courts evaluate whether the proposed change aligns with the settlor’s intent, addresses actual problems without overreaching, and provides notice to those affected. The process may involve hearings, mediation, or settlement negotiations to resolve competing interests and reach an order that implements the approved modifications.
A trustee is the person or entity responsible for managing the trust assets and carrying out the terms of the trust as written by the settlor. Trustees have fiduciary duties to administer the trust prudently and in the best interests of the beneficiaries. When a petition to modify a trust is filed, trustees may be named as respondents, and the court will consider how proposed changes affect the trustee’s duties. Trustees must provide accountings and cooperate with the court process when ordered, while also protecting the trust’s assets and carrying out any approved modifications.
A beneficiary is a person or organization entitled to receive benefits under the trust according to its terms. Beneficiaries have a legal interest in any petition to modify the trust because changes can affect their financial rights and distributions. The court requires notice to beneficiaries, and they have the opportunity to support, oppose, or seek changes to proposed modifications. Courts weigh how modifications will impact beneficiaries, including short-term needs and long-term expectations, to ensure changes are fair and consistent with the settlor’s intent.
When a trust problem arises, interested parties can choose among several legal paths such as informal settlement, mediation, consent-based amendments, or a formal petition to modify the trust. Informal resolution can be faster and less costly when parties agree, but it may not produce a binding court order. Mediation helps manage disputes confidentially and find compromise solutions. A formal petition provides judicial authority to change trust terms, which is helpful when agreement cannot be reached or when clarity from the court is necessary. Choosing the right path depends on the nature of the dispute and the willingness of parties to cooperate.
A limited approach can resolve issues such as typographical errors, minor ambiguities, or inaccurate beneficiary descriptions without a full reworking of the trust. If the problem can be fixed with narrow language changes that do not alter the overall distribution scheme, parties may prefer a targeted petition or consent amendment. This minimizes disruption to trust administration, can reduce legal costs, and may preserve family relationships by avoiding broad disputes. Courts generally favor narrowly tailored solutions that correct clear mistakes while honoring the trust’s fundamental intentions.
When all interested parties agree on the proposed change, a limited approach is often efficient and effective. An agreement may take the form of a stipulated petition or a court order approving jointly requested modifications. This route is particularly useful when the change improves administration or clarifies intent and beneficiaries are comfortable with the outcome. Courts often expedite cases where there is consensus, and the resulting order provides binding authority that protects trustees and beneficiaries moving forward, reducing the risk of future disputes.
A comprehensive approach is warranted when disputes involve competing beneficiary claims, allegations of undue influence, or questions about the settlor’s capacity at the time of creation. These situations require thorough factual investigation, careful legal analysis, and litigation readiness. Preparing for contested hearings means gathering evidence, coordinating testimony, and developing legal theories that persuade the court to grant the requested relief. A broad strategy helps address related issues concurrently, such as trustee removal, accounting disputes, or claims challenging the trust’s validity, to achieve a durable resolution.
When the trust is part of a complex estate plan with wills, trust networks, and ancillary instruments, a comprehensive assessment is necessary to ensure any modification harmonizes with the entire plan. Changes to one document can have ripple effects on pour-over wills, retirement plan trusts, or irrevocable arrangements. Careful coordination prevents unintended consequences such as disinheritance, tax problems, or administrative confusion. A court-supervised modification provides a formal mechanism to address interconnected instruments and preserve the settlor’s overall estate planning objectives.
Taking a comprehensive approach to trust modification provides several benefits, including a clear judicial record, binding authority that reduces future disputes, and the ability to address related issues in a single proceeding. Courts can issue orders that resolve competing claims, clarify trustee powers, and implement changes in a way that protects beneficiaries’ interests. This consolidated method is especially helpful when the trust supports ongoing care arrangements, special needs planning, or long-term financial strategies that require certainty and enforceability.
Additionally, a comprehensive approach allows for thorough investigation and consideration of all relevant documents, communications, and circumstances that inform the settlor’s intent. Judges can balance legal principles with equitable considerations to craft relief that is both legally sound and practically workable for trustees and beneficiaries. Although the process may take longer than an informal fix, the resulting order reduces ambiguity, provides direction for administration, and helps prevent future litigation over the same issues.
A major benefit of pursuing a court-approved modification is the finality it provides. When a judge signs an order that implements changes to a trust, it becomes an authoritative record that trustees and beneficiaries can rely upon. This reduces the likelihood of subsequent challenges and helps trustees manage assets and distributions without fear of unexpected reversals. The certainty provided by court orders is particularly valuable for trusts that support ongoing financial obligations, guardianship plans, or long-term care arrangements where stability is important.
Comprehensive proceedings enable courts to address multiple related disputes in a single forum, including trustee actions, accounting issues, and competing beneficiary claims. Resolving these matters together promotes consistent outcomes and reduces the need for separate lawsuits that could produce conflicting rulings. Consolidation also conserves judicial and client resources by allowing fact-finding and legal arguments to be coordinated. This approach supports a holistic resolution that considers the trust’s purpose, the settlor’s intent, and the needs of all interested parties.
Collecting clear, dated documents is essential for supporting a petition to modify a trust. Assemble the original trust instrument, any amendments, relevant correspondence with the settlor, medical records if capacity is an issue, and financial statements that demonstrate changed circumstances. Affidavits from people who knew the settlor’s intentions can also be persuasive if they describe consistent statements of intent. Presenting a well-organized evidentiary package helps the court understand the background and makes it easier to reach a favorable decision, while also reducing the time and expense of confirming facts at a hearing.
Anticipate and prepare for possible challenges by identifying weaknesses in your position and gathering evidence to address them. Common contest themes include claims of undue influence, lack of capacity, or that the proposed change contradicts the settlor’s intent. Preparing witness declarations, medical documentation, and contemporaneous writings that support the requested modification can neutralize opposing arguments. Careful preparation also helps inform settlement discussions and demonstrates to the court that the petition was filed in good faith to serve the trust’s purposes rather than to advantage one party unfairly.
Consider a trust modification petition whenever the trust’s terms no longer reflect the settlor’s intent or practical circumstances that affect beneficiaries or administration. Examples include changes in beneficiary needs, errors in drafting that create ambiguity, shifts in tax rules that alter distribution strategies, or circumstances that make the original provisions unworkable. Petitioning the court secures a formal resolution and provides legal authority to implement changes that protect assets and uphold the settlor’s goals. It is especially valuable when voluntary agreement among parties is unlikely or when clarity from the court will aid trustees.
Other considerations include concerns about trustee conduct, the need to update provisions for guardianship nominations or pet trusts, or correcting mistakes that could lead to unintended disinheritance. If a trust is tied to other documents like pour-over wills or retirement plan trusts, a modification can harmonize those instruments. Seeking judicial approval reduces the risk of future disputes and offers a legally enforceable path to preserve the long-term administration and purpose of the estate plan, providing stability for beneficiaries and fiduciaries alike.
Typical reasons to file a petition include drafting errors that create ambiguity, changes in beneficiary circumstances such as disability or financial hardship, the settlor’s incapacity affecting their ability to amend, or changes in law that undermine the trust’s operation. Additional reasons can include the need to remove or replace a trustee, address tax planning problems, or implement provisions like special needs trusts or pet trusts that were overlooked. Each circumstance requires tailored legal strategy, documentation, and sometimes coordination with other related estate planning instruments.
Ambiguous trust language can produce confusion over how assets should be managed or distributed, prompting interested parties to seek judicial clarification. When terms conflict or are unclear about the settlor’s intent, a petition can request the court interpret the language or reform the document to reflect what the settlor intended. The court will consider the trust itself, surrounding circumstances, and any extrinsic evidence that sheds light on intent. Clarifying language through a court order helps trustees administer the trust consistently and protects beneficiaries from differing interpretations that could cause disputes.
Beneficiaries’ needs can change dramatically over time due to disability, special needs, divorce, or financial hardship. When distributions or trust provisions no longer serve the intended protective purpose, a modification may be necessary to reallocate resources or tailor support. Courts consider how changes advance the trust’s objective and whether modifications protect the long-term welfare of beneficiaries. Carefully documented reasons for change, such as medical or financial records, help demonstrate why the trust should be adjusted to reflect current realities while maintaining fidelity to the settlor’s purposes.
When the settlor becomes incapacitated or experiences significant life changes, such as remarriage or the birth of grandchildren, the original trust provisions may no longer be appropriate. If the settlor cannot execute a valid amendment, interested parties can petition the court to make narrowly tailored changes that further the trust’s purpose and support beneficiaries. Courts will closely evaluate evidence of the settlor’s prior statements, documented intentions, and the reasonableness of proposed modifications to ensure they reflect the settlor’s wishes as closely as possible.
The Law Offices of Robert P. Bergman serves clients in Torrance and throughout Los Angeles County, providing guidance on trust modification petitions and related estate planning matters. We help gather documentation, identify interested parties, file petitions, and represent clients in court proceedings or settlement negotiations. Our approach emphasizes clear communication, efficient case management, and strategies designed to protect the settlor’s objectives and beneficiaries’ interests. If you face a trust issue that requires court involvement, we will explain your options, the likely timeline, and the documentary support you will need to pursue a favorable outcome.
The Law Offices of Robert P. Bergman brings practical experience in estate planning matters to clients seeking trust modifications in Torrance and Los Angeles County. We focus on thoughtful case assessment, clear drafting of petitions, and strategic advocacy in court to secure necessary changes to trust documents. Our firm emphasizes collaborative solutions where feasible while preparing thoroughly for contested matters. We work closely with trustees, beneficiaries, and other counsel to build evidence-based petitions that honor the settlor’s intent and respond to the realities that prompted the requested change.
When a modification requires filing in probate or superior court, careful procedural compliance and persuasive presentation matter. We assist clients with the collection of documentary support, drafting clear declarations and proposed orders, and handling notices to interested parties. We also prioritize communication to keep clients informed about progress, potential outcomes, and next steps. Our goal is to provide practical, well-reasoned representation that navigates court processes efficiently and seeks results that preserve the estate plan’s purpose over time.
We understand the emotional and financial pressures that often accompany trust disputes and approach each matter with sensitivity and professionalism. In addition to litigation, we explore alternative dispute resolution when appropriate to reduce time and cost. For clients who seek stability, a court-approved modification provides a durable solution and clarity for trustees and beneficiaries. We help clients weigh the pros and cons of different strategies and select the path that best aligns with the trust’s goals and family circumstances.
Our process begins with a thorough case evaluation to determine whether a petition is appropriate and which legal route best serves your objectives. We review the trust and related documents, collect supporting evidence, identify interested parties, and outline likely procedural steps in the Los Angeles County courts. After discussing the strategy, we prepare the petition and supporting declarations, handle required notice and service, and pursue resolution through negotiation, mediation, or a court hearing as needed. Throughout the process we emphasize efficiency and clear client communication to achieve a sustainable outcome.
Step one involves detailed document review and fact-finding to establish the basis for modification. We examine the trust instrument, amendments, related estate planning documents like pour-over wills and retirement plan trusts, and any communications reflecting the settlor’s intent. Gathering evidence may include obtaining medical records, financial statements, witness declarations, and prior correspondence. Organizing this material early allows us to assess the strength of the case, anticipate opposing arguments, and determine whether a negotiated solution is feasible or if court intervention is required.
A comprehensive review of the trust and related estate planning documents is essential to understand the trust’s structure and identify potential conflicts. We analyze provisions such as successor trustee designations, distribution rules, special trust arrangements like irrevocable life insurance trusts, and any provisions referencing beneficiaries or guardianship nominations. This review helps reveal drafting errors, unintended consequences, or inconsistencies among documents that the court should address. Understanding these relationships informs the proposed modifications and ensures that changes are harmonized with the broader estate plan.
Collecting supporting evidence involves assembling declarations from witnesses who can attest to the settlor’s intent, medical records if capacity is contested, financial documents showing changed circumstances, and any contemporaneous writings. Witness statements that recount consistent expressions of intent are particularly useful when the trust language is ambiguous. Organizing evidence into a clear narrative strengthens the petition and prepares the case for negotiation or adjudication. Thorough evidence-gathering reduces surprises during hearings and increases the likelihood the court will grant narrowly tailored relief.
Once the petition and supporting materials are prepared, we file the petition with the appropriate probate or superior court and ensure all interested parties receive proper notice. The court requires proof of service to demonstrate that beneficiaries, trustees, and other respondents were informed of the request. Timely and accurate notice is critical to preserve the court’s jurisdiction and avoid procedural challenges. After filing, parties often have an opportunity to respond or enter settlement discussions, and the court may schedule a hearing or encourage alternative dispute resolution depending on the circumstances.
Preparing court documents requires careful drafting of the petition, proposed order outlining requested changes, and supporting declarations. These materials must present a coherent factual and legal basis for modification, attach the trust and relevant documents, and identify all interested parties. Filing deadlines and court requirements differ by county, so attention to local rules in Los Angeles County is important. A well-organized filing that anticipates likely questions reduces delays and increases the chance that the court will consider the petition efficiently.
After filing, the petition must be properly served on all required parties. Service methods and timelines vary, so verifying compliance with procedural rules is essential to avoid jurisdictional challenges. Interested parties may respond with objections or requests for more information, and service often prompts settlement conversations. We handle responses strategically, addressing legitimate concerns while protecting the petition’s core rationale. Managing responses includes scheduling hearings, negotiating stipulations, and preparing for potential contested proceedings if agreement is not reached.
Following filing and service, the court may schedule a hearing to consider the petition or encourage the parties to mediate. At a hearing, the judge evaluates the evidence and legal arguments and decides whether to grant the requested modification or issue a different remedy. Parties may reach a settlement or stipulated order that the court approves, which can be faster and less adversarial. The final order formalizes the modification and directs trustees and beneficiaries on administration under the new terms, reducing ambiguity and providing enforceable guidance going forward.
Preparing for a hearing includes assembling witness declarations, organizing documentary evidence, and crafting legal arguments that demonstrate why the proposed modifications are consistent with the settlor’s intent and necessary under the circumstances. A clear presentation helps the judge understand the need for change and the expected outcomes. Adequate preparation also involves anticipating opposing arguments and having rebuttal evidence ready. By presenting a focused case, parties improve the chances of obtaining an order that implements precise, workable modifications to the trust instrument.
If the court grants the petition, it issues a final order that specifies the approved changes and any related directives regarding trustee duties or accounting. The order becomes part of the public record and guides future administration of the trust. Trustees must follow the court’s directives and update trust records accordingly. Implementing the order may involve updating asset titling, coordinating with financial institutions, and communicating changes to beneficiaries. A court-approved modification provides legal clarity and helps prevent subsequent disputes over the revised trust terms.
California courts may permit modifications for a variety of reasons, such as mistakes in the original drafting that frustrate the trust’s purpose, changed circumstances that render provisions impractical, or ambiguities that cannot be resolved through ordinary interpretation. Petitioners often rely on documentary evidence, witness declarations, and legal arguments to show that the proposed change better reflects the settlor’s intent or preserves the trust’s core objective. The court evaluates whether the requested modification aligns with legal standards and balances beneficiary interests. In some cases, statutory provisions allow equitable reformation to correct mistakes or reflect the settlor’s true intent when it is shown by clear and convincing evidence. The specific grounds and procedural requirements vary depending on whether the settlor is alive, incapacitated, or deceased. Courts focus on preserving the settlor’s intent while ensuring fairness among beneficiaries and proper administration of trust assets.
Yes. If the settlor is incapacitated and unable to amend the trust personally, interested parties can petition the court for modification when changes are necessary to address incapacity-related needs or other unforeseen circumstances. The court carefully examines medical documentation and other evidence to determine whether the requested modification reasonably reflects the settlor’s intent and serves their interests, while also protecting beneficiaries’ rights. When the settlor has passed away, petitions commonly aim to correct mistakes, clarify ambiguous terms, or address issues that arise during administration. Courts review the trust document, prior statements by the settlor, and other relevant evidence to determine whether a modification is appropriate and consistent with the trust’s purpose.
Timelines for trust modification cases vary widely depending on the complexity of the issues, the level of agreement among parties, and the court’s schedule. Uncontested petitions or stipulated modifications can sometimes be resolved in a matter of weeks to a few months, while contested matters involving complex evidence or multiple parties may take many months or longer to reach resolution. Local court calendars in Los Angeles County also influence scheduling and hearing dates. Engaging in early evidence-gathering, providing clear notice to interested parties, and exploring mediation can help streamline the process. Preparing solid, organized filings reduces the likelihood of procedural delays and increases the potential for timely rulings by the court.
Courts consider the trust document itself, any amendments, relevant correspondence, and evidence such as witness declarations and medical records when deciding whether to grant a modification. When capacity or mistake is at issue, contemporaneous writings or medical records can be persuasive. Financial documents showing changed circumstances may also support the requested change by demonstrating that the trust’s original terms are impractical. Judges weigh this factual record against legal standards, focusing on whether the proposed modification is consistent with the settlor’s intent and whether it fairly balances competing interests among beneficiaries and trustees. Clear, organized evidence strengthens the petition and supports a reasoned judicial decision.
Yes. Beneficiaries and other interested parties are entitled to notice of a petition to modify a trust and the opportunity to respond. The court requires proper service to ensure all parties with legal interests can be heard, present evidence, or object to proposed changes. This procedural safeguard helps protect beneficiaries’ rights and ensures that any modification receives appropriate scrutiny before approval. If beneficiaries agree to a stipulated modification, the court can enter an order based on the parties’ agreement. When beneficiaries oppose the petition, the court will evaluate the evidence at a hearing and issue a ruling that reflects both the legal standards and the trust’s purpose while addressing competing claims.
Yes. Many trust disputes are resolved through alternative dispute resolution, such as mediation or settlement negotiations. These approaches allow parties to craft mutually acceptable solutions, avoid the uncertainty of litigation, and reduce time and expense. Mediation is particularly useful when relationships between family members or beneficiaries are important to preserve, because it encourages collaborative problem-solving and confidentiality. When parties reach a settlement, they can submit a stipulated petition to the court for approval, which results in a binding order that implements the agreed-upon changes. This provides the benefits of judicial authority while minimizing adversarial litigation.
Modifying a trust can have implications for related documents like pour-over wills, retirement plan trusts, irrevocable life insurance trusts, and beneficiary designations. Any change must be evaluated for ripple effects across the broader estate plan to ensure consistency and prevent unintended consequences. Coordinating modifications with related instruments helps preserve the settlor’s overall estate planning goals and protects against conflicts among documents. When modifications are contemplated, it is important to review all ancillary documents and consider whether supplemental changes or communications are necessary to maintain coherence. Courts appreciate demonstrations that the proposed modification harmonizes with the entire plan and advances the settlor’s intentions holistically.
If a trustee opposes a proposed modification, the court will consider the trustee’s arguments along with the petitioner’s evidence and legal reasoning. Trustees have fiduciary duties and may oppose changes they believe conflict with the trust’s terms or harm beneficiaries. The court evaluates these objections and determines whether the modification is appropriate under applicable law and supported by the record. In contested situations, litigation may be necessary to resolve disagreements. However, courts often encourage settlement or mediation to minimize disruption. Trustees who raise legitimate concerns can negotiate terms that address their duties while allowing necessary changes to proceed in a way that protects the trust’s administration.
Alternatives to filing a petition include negotiating a consensual amendment among interested parties, executing a nunc pro tunc amendment if the settlor is able and willing, or using mediation to resolve disagreements without formal litigation. If all beneficiaries and the trustee agree, a stipulated petition or consent-based amendment can be quicker and less adversarial than a contested court proceeding. However, when parties cannot reach agreement or when the settlor is unable to act and the modification is necessary to preserve the trust’s purpose, a formal court petition provides authoritative relief that private agreements may not offer. Courts can issue binding orders that protect trustees and beneficiaries over time.
To prepare in support of a petition, gather the trust document and any amendments, contemporaneous writings or correspondence showing the settlor’s intent, medical records if capacity is an issue, and financial documents evidencing changed circumstances. Witness declarations that recount consistent statements of intent can also be helpful. Organize these materials into a clear narrative that explains why the modification is necessary and how it aligns with the settlor’s objectives. Early communication with interested parties and attempts at negotiated resolution can also be beneficial. Providing notice and exploring settlement options may lead to stipulated orders that the court can approve, which often saves time and reduces conflict compared to contested litigation.
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