A Heggstad petition is a legal procedure used in California when assets were intended to become part of a trust but title or paperwork was not properly updated before a person’s death. For residents of Chowchilla and Madera County, this petition asks the court to treat specific property as though it had been transferred to the decedent’s trust, based on the decedent’s intent and the surrounding facts. Filing a Heggstad petition can avoid a full probate administration, resolve conflicting title issues, and ensure that trust beneficiaries receive property consistent with the decedent’s estate plan. The petition relies on documented intent and evidence demonstrating that the transfer was meant to fund the trust.
When a deed, account, or transfer paperwork does not match the trust documents, families often face uncertainty, delays, and added legal steps. A Heggstad petition provides a court process to reconcile those inconsistencies by presenting the trust instrument, related documents, witness declarations, and other proof that the decedent intended the property to be trust property. The petition can be used alongside pour-over wills and other estate planning tools to align assets with the overall plan. Timely action and careful documentation are essential to a successful petition and to minimizing the risk of contested proceedings in Madera County courts.
A Heggstad petition matters because it offers a focused path to place property into an already existing trust despite title irregularities. For families in Chowchilla, using this petition can prevent the larger expense and public exposure of probate, streamline distribution to beneficiaries, and clear title for real estate or accounts that were intended to be managed by the trust. It also reduces potential disputes by presenting documentary and testimonial evidence of the decedent’s intent. Courts assess intent, documents, and circumstances; when the record supports the claim, the petition can produce a judicial order that simplifies post-death property transfers.
The Law Offices of Robert P. Bergman serves California families with estate planning and trust administration matters, including Heggstad petitions. We guide clients through gathering trust documents, deeds, account records, and declarations needed to support a petition in Madera County. Our approach emphasizes clear communication, careful preparation of the petition and supporting declarations, and coordination with local court procedures. We focus on practical steps to restore assets to the trust and limit delays for beneficiaries. Clients receive tailored guidance that reflects their unique estate plan and the specifics of the property at issue.
A Heggstad petition proceeds by presenting the trust document and evidence demonstrating that the decedent intended a particular transfer to fund the trust, even if the title or account name was never changed. Relevant materials commonly include the trust instrument, related declarations or pour-over wills, deeds, bank statements, and witness or beneficiary declarations describing the decedent’s intent. The petition explains the factual basis for treating the asset as trust property and requests a court order acknowledging the transfer. The process is fact-driven and often requires careful assembly of documentary and testimonial evidence to satisfy the court.
After filing, the court typically requires notice to interested parties and may set a hearing on the petition. If no party opposes the petition, the court may issue an order recognizing the property as trust property based on the evidence presented. When there is opposition, the court evaluates competing claims and the strength of the evidence showing the decedent’s intent. The outcome depends on local rules, the clarity of the trust documents, and the thoroughness of evidentiary submissions. Timely, organized preparation increases the likelihood of a favorable resolution without prolonged litigation.
A Heggstad petition asks the superior court to treat assets as if they had been placed into a decedent’s trust, despite a failure to change title or complete a transfer before death. The petition relies on the trust instrument, supporting paperwork, and testimony that together demonstrate the decedent’s clear intent. In practical terms, the petition resolves a mismatch between the estate plan and recorded ownership, enabling distribution according to trust provisions rather than through probate. The court’s order provides clarity for title companies, financial institutions, and heirs, allowing the property to be administered under the trust’s terms.
Key elements of a Heggstad petition include proving the decedent’s intent, producing the trust document and any related estate planning instruments, obtaining declarations or affidavits from witnesses, and providing documentary evidence such as deeds or account statements. The procedural steps usually involve preparing the petition, serving notice on interested parties, filing supporting declarations and exhibits, and attending a court hearing if required. The court examines whether the transfer was intended to make property trust-owned and whether any competing claims exist. Properly organized evidence and compliance with local filing rules are essential for moving the matter to resolution.
Understanding common terms helps when preparing or reviewing a Heggstad petition. Terms address the relationship between deeds, trust instruments, and accounts, and clarify the roles of declarations, constructive transfers, and judicial orders. A glossary can demystify phrases used in petitions and court rulings, supporting informed decisions about whether a petition is appropriate for a specific asset. Clear definitions also help family members and fiduciaries recognize when a targeted court action may be needed to align property title with the decedent’s trust plan.
A Heggstad petition is a California legal filing used to have property treated as trust property when the decedent intended the transfer but title or paperwork failed to reflect it. The petition relies on the trust instrument, supporting documents, and declarations establishing the decedent’s intent. Courts consider the totality of evidence to decide whether to enter an order recognizing the property as belonging to the trust. This remedy is designed to reconcile recorded ownership with the decedent’s estate plan and to avoid broader probate proceedings when appropriate.
The term refers to a legal finding that equity treats property as having been transferred to a trust despite formal transfer defects, based on the decedent’s intent and actions. When the court concludes that a constructive transfer occurred, it may issue an order directing that the property be administered under the trust. This avoids the need for a full probate if the circumstances support the finding. The concept relies on equitable principles and detailed evidence showing the decedent intended the trust to control the asset.
A pour-over will is an estate planning device that funnels assets into a trust upon a person’s death, naming the trust as the ultimate beneficiary for property not titled to the trust during life. When the decedent intended assets to pass under a pour-over will into a trust, a Heggstad petition can be used to align title with that intent for specific assets. Evidence demonstrating the interplay between the pour-over will and the trust strengthens a petition seeking judicial recognition of the intended trust ownership.
A supporting declaration or affidavit is a sworn statement from someone with personal knowledge about the decedent’s intent or actions, such as a spouse, family member, fiduciary, or a professional who assisted with the estate plan. These declarations often describe conversations, document signing, or the circumstances showing the decedent intended the property to be trust-owned. When combined with the trust instrument and related documents, such declarations help the court assess whether a Heggstad petition should be granted.
Choosing between filing a Heggstad petition and pursuing a full probate administration depends on the asset mix, value, and the clarity of evidence showing intent. A Heggstad petition targets specific property and aims to place it into a trust with a relatively narrow court proceeding. Probate is broader, opening the estate for administration under probate procedures and often involving more time, court supervision, and public filings. For many families, a focused petition can resolve discrete title issues more efficiently, but in some situations, probate remains the appropriate route when multiple or complex estate matters cannot be resolved through piecemeal petitions.
A focused Heggstad petition often suffices when there is strong documentary evidence that the decedent intended the asset to belong to the trust. Examples include a trust document that references the asset, contemporaneous deeds or account instructions, and written notes showing intent. When the evidence is organized and persuasive, the court can enter an order recognizing trust ownership without opening a full probate estate. This streamlined path saves time, reduces public exposure of estate details, and allows beneficiaries to receive property under the trust’s terms with minimal additional court oversight.
A limited approach is appropriate where only a small number of assets were affected by a title error or omission and the remaining estate is already properly titled or addressed by other planning documents. When the matter is confined to a particular deed or account and there are no widespread creditor or distribution issues, a targeted petition reduces complexity and cost. The streamlined procedure focuses on evidence supporting the intended transfer and minimizes the need for extended court supervision compared to a probate administration that encompasses all estate affairs.
Comprehensive legal services are advisable when several assets reflect conflicting ownership, when creditor claims exist, or when beneficiary disputes are likely to arise. In such cases, a probate administration or broader trust litigation may be necessary to resolve competing interests, pay debts, and ensure accurate distribution. A full estate process allows the court to supervise claims and distributions across the decedent’s entire estate, providing a single forum to resolve complex issues that cannot be addressed effectively through individual Heggstad petitions targeting isolated assets.
When intent is unclear, documentation is missing, or the decedent executed multiple conflicting instruments, a broader approach may be needed to resolve legal uncertainties. Under those circumstances, a more comprehensive legal plan that includes evidentiary discovery, formal probate procedures, or contested trust litigation can uncover facts, allow testimony, and provide the court with the necessary context to make binding decisions. Comprehensive representation helps families navigate complex disputes and ensures that distribution follows lawful and equitable processes.
A comprehensive approach brings together trust review, title correction, and court procedures under a coordinated plan that addresses all related assets and potential disputes. This method reduces the risk of piecemeal litigation, ensures consistent handling of creditor claims and beneficiary interests, and creates a clear record for future property transfers. For complicated estates, centralized handling fosters efficiency in resolving interrelated issues and produces court orders that comprehensively settle ownership and distribution matters, minimizing the need for later corrective actions.
In addition to legal clarity, a full approach often provides better protection for beneficiaries by anticipating possible challenges and addressing them proactively. Working through all assets together can reveal planning gaps, prevent competing claims, and allow fiduciaries to distribute property with confidence. Although a broader process can take longer than a single petition, it can ultimately save time and expense by avoiding repeated filings and disputes. Courts often prefer consolidated resolution when matters affect multiple properties or involve contested questions of intent and ownership.
One major benefit is obtaining a clear court order confirming ownership, which simplifies subsequent transfers and dealings with title companies or financial institutions. When the court recognizes trust ownership or resolves competing claims, beneficiaries can move forward with confidence to sell, refinance, or manage property. Clear title reduces friction, avoids future disputes over ownership, and helps prevent institutions from refusing to accept transfers based on incomplete records. A comprehensive approach seeks to produce finality and practical results for the families involved.
A coordinated legal strategy lessens the likelihood that unresolved title issues will later turn into costly litigation. By addressing all contested matters and obtaining judicial findings where appropriate, the process minimizes the chance of renewed challenges after property has changed hands. The resulting court orders and records provide a durable legal foundation for beneficiaries and fiduciaries to rely on, reducing uncertainty and protecting family resources. This preventive value often outweighs the cost and time required for a consolidated legal process in complex situations.
Begin by collecting every document that might show the decedent’s intent, including the trust, deeds, bank statements, account beneficiary forms, and related correspondence. Statements and deeds that reference the trust or indicate intended transfers are especially helpful. Witness declarations describing conversations or actions at the time of signing bolster the factual record. Organizing these materials at the outset saves time and supports a persuasive petition, reducing the risk of delays from missing exhibits or the need for additional discovery later in the process.
Anticipate potential objections by identifying likely participants who must be notified and considering arguments they may raise. Address common issues up front, such as discrepancies in dates or signatures, by providing context and corroborating evidence. Where necessary, prepare to narrow the petition to specific property to expedite resolution. Early communication with interested parties can sometimes resolve disputes without contested hearings, but be ready to present the full evidentiary record if the court requires more development of the facts.
Families often consider a Heggstad petition when they discover property that should have been transferred to a trust but remains titled improperly in the decedent’s name. This happens when deeds were signed before the trust was executed, account title changes were not completed, or institution policies prevented timely retitling. Filing a petition can reconcile these issues and align the asset with the trust’s distribution plan. Choosing this route can reduce the scope of estate court involvement and get property to beneficiaries more quickly than a full probate process would.
Other reasons include resolving problems with financial institutions that refuse to recognize trust ownership without a court order and addressing disputes among heirs about the intended disposition of property. A successful petition provides clarity for title companies and banks, which facilitates transfers, sales, or management of property. When timely pursued, this approach can preserve family resources and prevent prolonged disputes, helping beneficiaries receive assets in accordance with the decedent’s estate plan and reducing stress during an already difficult time.
Typical circumstances include real property with a deed still in the decedent’s name, bank accounts that could not be retitled before death, assets that were intended to be covered by a pour-over will, and transfers that were begun but not finalized. Institutions may decline to honor the trust without a court order, or beneficiaries may disagree about ownership. In such cases, a Heggstad petition provides a targeted, document-focused mechanism to confirm trust ownership and allow the trust administration to proceed for the specific assets in question.
A common issue arises when real estate deeds were never re-recorded in the name of the decedent’s trust, leaving title in the decedent’s individual name. This can occur when the trust was executed after signing a deed, or when the deed transfer process was overlooked. A Heggstad petition presents the trust and supporting evidence to the court to show the decedent intended the property to be held by the trust, allowing the court to clarify ownership and facilitate subsequent transfer or sale under the trust’s terms.
Financial accounts sometimes remain in the decedent’s name because institutions required additional documentation or retitling was delayed. When accounts were meant to fund the trust, a Heggstad petition can help align account ownership with the trust by demonstrating intent and providing the court with the trust instrument and supporting declarations. The resulting order assists institutions in recognizing the trust and enables fiduciaries to manage or distribute the accounts in accordance with the trust.
Pour-over wills funnel after-death property into a trust, but when title issues arise, the court may need to confirm specific assets belong to the trust. A Heggstad petition helps translate the decedent’s estate plan into enforceable ownership recognition by connecting the pour-over will, trust provisions, and any available evidence of intent. When the court issues an order, trustees and beneficiaries can proceed with administration and distribution under the trust’s terms rather than navigating estate property through a separate or extended probate process.
The Law Offices of Robert P. Bergman assists families in Chowchilla and throughout Madera County with targeted filings like Heggstad petitions and related trust administration matters. We help clients identify the relevant documents, prepare declarations that communicate the decedent’s intent, and manage court filings and notices to interested parties. Our goal is to secure a court order recognizing trust ownership when the facts support it, simplifying transfers and reducing delay for beneficiaries. We work to keep clients informed through every step of the process and to coordinate with title companies and financial institutions as needed.
Choosing legal representation familiar with California trust procedures and local court practices helps ensure a Heggstad petition is presented in a manner that addresses evidentiary and procedural requirements. The Law Offices of Robert P. Bergman provides focused support to assemble the trust documents, declarations, and exhibits judges expect to see in Madera County courts. We aim to clarify issues for institutions and interested parties and to reduce the risk of unnecessary delays. Practical preparation and court responsiveness are central to achieving an effective outcome.
When working on a Heggstad petition, our role includes organizing the documentary record, drafting clear factual declarations, preparing required notices, and shepherding the petition through local filing and hearing procedures. We prioritize transparent communication with clients about likely timelines and potential areas of dispute so that families can make informed choices. Effective pre-filing work often reduces the likelihood of contested hearings and helps the court reach a prompt resolution when the facts support the petition.
We also coordinate with title companies and financial institutions to ensure the court order will be accepted for transfer or retitling, addressing any technical requirements those entities may have. Helping trustees and beneficiaries carry out the court’s order is part of the overall service, smoothing the transition of property into trust administration and facilitating subsequent distribution or property management consistent with the trust terms. Clear documentation and careful follow-through are priorities from filing through final disposition.
Our process begins with an intake meeting to review the trust, deeds, account records, and related instruments to assess whether a Heggstad petition is appropriate. We then identify required declarations and exhibits, prepare the petition and notice documents, and file with the appropriate superior court. We handle service on interested parties and prepare for any hearing, responding to inquiries and objections as necessary. The objective is to obtain a court order recognizing trust ownership when the facts support that result and to assist with subsequent title or account transfers.
The first step focuses on a thorough review of the trust instrument and all related documents to determine whether a Heggstad petition is warranted. This includes locating deeds, bank and brokerage statements, beneficiary designations, pour-over wills, and any correspondence that explains the decedent’s intent. We also identify potential interested parties who must receive notice and assess whether any foreseeable objections could arise. Gathering a complete documentary record at this stage reduces the risk of later surprises and positions the petition for efficient processing.
We obtain the trust instrument, all executed amendments, deeds, account statements, and any transfer-related paperwork that ties the asset to the trust or demonstrates intent. This step also includes requesting copies from institutions and searching recorded records. Accurate exhibits showing signatures, dates, and related transactions are assembled and indexed so the petition can reference them directly. Well-organized evidence is critical to supporting the factual narrative that the court will evaluate.
Drafting clear declarations from those with direct knowledge of the decedent’s intent is essential. Declarations should recount observed facts, relevant conversations, and the circumstances around signing or handling documents. Witness statements are paired with documentary exhibits to form a cohesive record for the court. Attention to factual detail and chronological clarity helps the judge understand why the asset should be treated as trust property, reducing the chance of ambiguity or misinterpretation during the review process.
After assembling the record, we prepare and file the petition and required notice documents with the superior court. Proper service on heirs, beneficiaries, and other interested parties is completed in accordance with local rules to ensure procedural validity. We coordinate with court clerks, monitor any objections or responses, and maintain communication with clients about next steps. If contested, the matter may require additional declarations or briefing; if uncontested, a hearing can often resolve the petition efficiently with an appropriate order.
Service on interested parties follows court rules and includes heirs, named beneficiaries, and any parties with recorded interests. We track proofs of service and review any responses or objections to determine whether additional factual support or negotiation is needed. Early identification of potential disputes allows for targeted responses and can minimize the need for extended litigation. Clear documentation of service and response timelines helps keep the case moving toward resolution.
When the court schedules a hearing, we present the petition, supporting documents, and declarations to the judge, explaining the factual basis for treating the property as trust-owned. If opposition exists, we respond to legal and factual challenges and provide supplementary evidence as needed. Upon a favorable ruling, the court issues an order that trustees and financial institutions can rely on to complete transfers or retitling. We then assist with implementation of the order to ensure the property is administered under the trust.
Once the court issues an order recognizing trust ownership, we help implement the order by coordinating with title companies, banks, and other institutions to update records and effect transfers. This administrative phase includes providing certified copies of the order, working with escrow or title officers as necessary, and advising trustees on next steps for distribution or management. Our goal is to translate the court’s decision into practical results so beneficiaries can access or manage the assets as intended under the trust.
We supply certified copies of the court order, along with the trust instrument and any required supporting documents, to title companies, financial institutions, and escrow agents. Clear documentation helps those institutions accept the court’s determination and process transfers or retitling without unnecessary delay. We remain available to address technical questions or additional requests from these entities to ensure the court order is effectively implemented and the trust can manage or distribute the assets accordingly.
After transfer or retitling is complete, we advise trustees on obligations for managing the property under the trust, including notice to beneficiaries, record keeping, and any follow-up filings. If the order resolves a contested matter, we help document the resolution and ensure subsequent actions comply with the trust terms. Practical guidance during the post-order phase helps prevent future disputes and supports a smooth transition from court resolution to routine trust administration and distribution.
A Heggstad petition is a California court filing that asks the superior court to recognize particular property as trust property when the decedent intended the transfer but the title or account records do not reflect that intent. It is used to reconcile discrepancies between recorded ownership and the decedent’s estate plan, especially in situations where deeds or account retitling were not completed before death. The petition presents the trust, supporting documents, and declarations of individuals with knowledge to show that the asset should be administered under the trust rather than through probate. The petition process involves filing the petition and supporting exhibits, serving notice on interested parties, and obtaining a court order after review or a hearing. If the record is persuasive and no one successfully disputes the claim, the court can enter an order treating the property as trust-owned. This mechanism helps families avoid unnecessary probate proceedings for specific assets while ensuring that transfers align with the decedent’s estate planning intentions.
Timing for a Heggstad petition can vary based on the complexity of the evidence, the number of interested parties, and court schedules in Madera County. Preparing a thorough petition and assembling supporting declarations and exhibits typically takes several weeks, depending on how quickly documents and witness statements can be obtained. Once filed, the court’s calendar and the required notice period influence the timeline; uncontested matters can sometimes be resolved within a few months, while contested petitions may take longer because of discovery or additional hearings. Local court workload and the need for supplemental evidence affect overall duration. Promptly organizing deed records, trust pages, and witness declarations reduces delay. If interested parties raise objections, resolving factual disputes can extend the process. Effective pre-filing preparation and timely responses to court requests help move the matter toward resolution more quickly and with greater predictability for beneficiaries and fiduciaries.
Supporting evidence commonly includes the trust instrument and any amendments, deeds or account records showing the asset, pour-over wills if relevant, and written notes or correspondence that indicate the decedent’s intent. Declarations from witnesses who observed the decedent signing documents, instructed financial institutions, or discussed the intended transfer are especially important. Documentary evidence that ties the asset to the trust or shows contemporaneous intent carries considerable weight when presented alongside sworn witness statements. Organizing exhibits with clear references in the petition helps the court evaluate the claim. Photocopies of recorded deeds, account statements showing attempted transfers, and any instructions given to professionals involved in the planning should be included. Where signatures, dates, or procedural irregularities exist, declarations describing the circumstances can fill evidentiary gaps. Thorough documentation and credible, direct witness statements strengthen the petition’s chances of success.
Yes, interested parties who receive notice may file objections to a Heggstad petition. Common objections challenge the sufficiency of evidence, dispute the decedent’s intent, or assert competing ownership claims. When objections arise, the court evaluates the arguments and evidence from both sides. The presence of objections can lead to additional briefing, supplemental declarations, or an evidentiary hearing to resolve disputed facts before the court can issue a final order regarding ownership and transfer. Handling objections requires careful legal and factual responses. Reply declarations and documentary evidence can be used to address challenges, and negotiations among parties sometimes resolve disputes without a contested hearing. If disputes persist, the court will decide based on the preponderance of evidence presented. Preparing for potential objections during the initial petition drafting increases the likelihood of effectively responding to opposition.
A Heggstad petition differs from probate in that it is a targeted court action addressing specific assets that were intended to be trust property but lack formal title changes, whereas probate is a comprehensive court-supervised administration of a decedent’s estate. Probate opens the estate for administration of all assets not already passing outside the estate, and it includes creditor notice, executor appointment, and court oversight of distributions. A Heggstad petition instead seeks judicial acknowledgment that particular property belongs to a trust, enabling distribution under trust terms without full probate oversight. While a successful petition can avoid probate for the targeted assets, it does not replace probate when broader estate administration is necessary due to multiple untitled assets, creditor concerns, or complex beneficiary disputes. Determining whether to pursue a petition or probate depends on the asset profile, clarity of documentation, and the family’s objectives for administration and distribution.
A Heggstad petition can avoid probate for the specific property at issue if the court finds sufficient evidence that the decedent intended the asset to be trust-owned. However, it will not automatically avoid probate for other untitled assets or situations where the estate requires broader administration for creditor resolution or complex distribution problems. The petition’s scope is limited to the property identified in the filing, so avoiding probate entirely for an estate depends on the overall asset structure and whether other probate triggers exist. Even when a petition successfully places property into a trust, additional administrative steps may be necessary to implement the court order and update institutional records. Trustees or fiduciaries should ensure compliance with the order and consult with counsel about any remaining estate matters that might still require probate. Using a petition strategically can minimize probate involvement but does not universally eliminate the need for probate in all circumstances.
Typically, the trustee or a person with a legal interest in the decedent’s estate or the trust may file a Heggstad petition. This includes trustees seeking recognition that property belongs to the trust, heirs or beneficiaries with standing to protect their interests, or personal representatives in certain situations. The filer must present a sufficient factual record to support the requested judicial determination, including the trust instrument and supporting declarations that establish the decedent’s intent to transfer the property to the trust. Choosing the appropriate petitioner and ensuring proper notice to interested parties is important for procedural validity. Counsel can advise who should file based on the trust terms, the asset involved, and the identities of potential respondents. Proper standing and careful compliance with service requirements help prevent procedural challenges that could delay resolution.
Common pitfalls include failing to gather all relevant documents before filing, relying on hearsay rather than direct knowledge in declarations, and neglecting required service on interested parties. Omitting key exhibits like the relevant pages of a trust, recorded deeds, or account records can create gaps that undermine the petition. Additionally, unclear or poorly organized declarations can leave the court uncertain about the basis for the requested relief. Anticipating and addressing these issues in advance strengthens the petition. Another frequent error is underestimating the need to coordinate with financial institutions or title companies about their documentation requirements. Even with a favorable court order, institutions may request certified copies or additional clarifying documents before completing transfers. Preparing for these administrative steps and requesting the necessary certified court papers in advance reduces the chance of post-order delays in implementing the court’s determination.
If an institution refuses to accept a court order, the next steps usually involve providing certified copies of the order and any supporting documents the institution requires. Often, the institution’s refusal is due to internal policy or a need for specific documentary forms. Working directly with officers at the institution and supplying any requested documentation usually resolves the issue. If the institution still refuses, counsel can correspond formally to explain the legal basis for the order and seek escalation within the institution’s review process. In rare cases where an institution persists in refusing compliance, additional court intervention may be necessary to clarify or expand the order. Counsel can request supplemental rulings or provide further evidentiary support to compel acceptance. Most disputes are resolved through document review and communication, but courts can enforce orders when required to ensure the trust’s administration proceeds according to the judicial determination.
Costs for a Heggstad petition vary depending on the complexity of the facts, the number of interested parties, and whether the matter is contested. Expenses typically include attorney time for document collection, drafting the petition and declarations, filing fees, service costs, and any additional court appearance time. Uncontested petitions for a single asset may be handled more quickly and at lower cost, while contested matters with discovery or hearings will increase fees. Each case requires a tailored estimate based on the anticipated work and potential for dispute. It is important to consider both direct legal fees and indirect costs such as the time required to collect records and coordinate with institutions. Transparent early discussions about likely scope and fees help families plan financially and make informed decisions about pursuing a petition or alternative routes. Where possible, focused pre-filing preparation can limit costs by reducing the need for supplemental filings or extended 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