A Heggstad petition is a legal procedure used when assets meant to fund a trust were left in the decedent’s personal name at the time of death. This petition asks the probate court to recognize that the decedent intended those assets to belong to the trust, enabling their transfer without extensive probate administration. For Parkwood residents, this process can simplify estate settlement, reduce delays, and preserve the trust’s purpose. The Law Offices of Robert P. Bergman provides attentive guidance through Heggstad matters, helping families understand options, prepare documents, and present clear evidence of the decedent’s intent to the court.
Many families discover after a loved one’s death that assets meant to be in a trust were never retitled. A Heggstad petition addresses this precise situation by seeking a court order that the asset was always intended to be trust property. The petition typically includes supporting documents such as the trust instrument, declarations of intent, correspondence, or records showing funding efforts. For residents of Parkwood and Madera County, pursuing a Heggstad petition can reduce the time and cost associated with probate and help ensure the decedent’s estate plan is honored in accordance with their wishes.
A Heggstad petition protects the goals of a decedent’s estate plan by allowing assets mistakenly left outside the trust to be recognized as trust property. This can prevent unnecessary probate, preserve privacy for the family, and align asset distribution with the decedent’s documented intentions. In Parkwood, pursuing a Heggstad petition can also speed the settlement process and reduce court oversight compared with a full probate administration. The petition focuses the court on intent rather than reopening the entire estate, offering an efficient path to consolidate trust assets and ensure beneficiaries receive what the trust intended.
The Law Offices of Robert P. Bergman serves clients throughout California with practical estate planning and trust administration services. Our approach emphasizes careful document review, thorough preparation of court filings, and clear communication with families during sensitive times. For Heggstad petitions we gather the necessary evidence of intent, coordinate with trustees and beneficiaries, and present a focused petition that respects court procedures. Located in the region and reachable at 408-528-2827, the firm offers guidance tailored to Parkwood and Madera County residents to protect beneficiary interests and honor the decedent’s estate plan.
A Heggstad petition asks the probate court to declare that certain assets were always intended to be part of a trust, even though formal funding did not occur before the decedent’s death. The petition typically requires demonstration of the decedent’s intent through the trust document, supporting correspondence, transaction records, beneficiary designations, or witness declarations. In Parkwood cases, the court evaluates whether the evidence supports treating the asset as trust property. This approach focuses on intent and purpose rather than relying solely on formal title, offering families a way to align probate outcomes with the decedent’s plan.
The practical steps in pursuing a Heggstad petition include identifying the mis-titled assets, gathering supporting documentation, preparing a clear petition and proposed order, and notifying interested parties. The court will review the evidence and may hold a hearing to assess credibility and legal sufficiency. For Madera County residents, timelines can vary based on court caseload and the complexity of evidence, but a well-prepared petition helps streamline the process. The goal is to obtain judicial recognition of the trust’s entitlement to the assets without the complexities of a full probate administration.
A Heggstad petition is a probate court action that seeks a declaration that certain property should be treated as trust property despite remaining in the decedent’s individual name. This petition originates from a widely recognized California case and is used when the trust instrument and related evidence show the decedent intended the asset to be part of the trust. It differs from other probate remedies because it zeroes in on intent to fund the trust rather than recreating the entire estate accounting. For families in Parkwood, a successful petition can prevent unnecessary delay and expense tied to a larger probate proceeding.
Successful Heggstad petitions rely on clear documentation and credible evidence of the decedent’s intent. Typical elements include the trust document itself, copies of asset transfer forms or beneficiary designations, communications showing plans to fund the trust, and affidavits from witnesses or the trustee. The petition must also detail the asset’s history and explain why formal retitling did not occur. Courts assess the totality of the evidence to conclude whether the decedent intended the trust to own the property. Careful preparation and organization of these materials are essential for a persuasive court filing.
Understanding the legal terms related to Heggstad petitions helps families follow the process and make informed decisions. This glossary covers common phrases such as trust, settlor, trustee, probate, funding, beneficiary designation, and petition. Each term clarifies roles, responsibilities, and procedural steps in seeking court recognition of trust ownership. For Parkwood residents, a clearer grasp of terminology reduces confusion during estate settlement, improves communication with counsel, and helps ensure that petitions include the precise language courts expect to assess intent and property status.
A trust is a legal arrangement in which a person (the settlor) transfers property to a trustee to hold and manage for the benefit of named beneficiaries according to written terms. Trusts can be revocable or irrevocable and often outline how assets will be managed during the settlor’s lifetime and distributed after death. In Heggstad proceedings, the trust instrument is central because it evidences the settlor’s intent to direct ownership and distribution of specific assets. Courts will compare the trust terms with the claimed asset to determine whether the trust was intended to include the property.
This petition is a court filing that requests judicial recognition that a particular asset should be treated as the trust’s asset, despite formal title indicating otherwise. It outlines the facts, legal authorities, and supporting evidence establishing the decedent’s intent to have the asset owned by the trust. The petition may propose a specific order directing the transfer or recognition of title in the trust’s name. Courts evaluate whether the evidence demonstrates the settlor’s clear intent and whether recognizing the asset as trust property aligns with the trust’s objectives.
Funding refers to the process of transferring ownership of property into a trust so that the trust can manage or distribute the asset according to its terms. Funding can involve changing title, updating beneficiary designations, or executing transfer documents. A Heggstad petition arises when funding was intended but not completed, and the petition seeks to correct that omission by showing the decedent’s intent. Proper funding is essential to ensure the trust operates as planned and that assets avoid probate where appropriate.
Probate is the court-supervised process of administering a decedent’s estate when assets are not held in a valid trust or otherwise transferred by nonprobate mechanisms. It includes proving the will, identifying assets, paying debts and taxes, and distributing property to heirs. A Heggstad petition can limit probate involvement by directing that specific assets be treated as trust property, thus bypassing the larger probate estate. Reducing probate helps families maintain privacy and diminish the time and costs associated with court-supervised administration.
When assets remain outside a trust, families can consider several paths: a Heggstad petition to recognize trust ownership, a full probate administration, or other probate avoidance strategies such as small estate proceedings or beneficiary-driven transfers. A Heggstad petition is often faster and more narrowly focused than probate, but its suitability depends on the strength of evidence demonstrating intent to fund the trust. In Parkwood, the choice hinges on the asset types, the clarity of documentation, and the preferences of beneficiaries. Careful evaluation helps determine the least disruptive, most cost-effective route to honoring the decedent’s plan.
A limited Heggstad petition is appropriate when the trust document and additional records clearly show the decedent intended a specific asset to be part of the trust. Examples include written instructions, transfer forms, or communications indicating an intent to fund. When such evidence is strong, the court can often resolve ownership questions without broader probate proceedings. For Parkwood families, a narrowly tailored petition reduces time and expense, while focusing the court’s review on the single disputed asset. This path works best when interested parties agree or when the record is unambiguous.
A limited petition is practical when beneficiaries and potential heirs do not vigorously contest the asset’s transfer to the trust. If parties are cooperative or indifferent, the court can more readily accept evidence and grant the requested relief. In contrast, contested matters may require fuller litigation or probate oversight. For residents of Parkwood, maintaining constructive communication among family members and demonstrating documentary support can make a focused petition faster and less costly, avoiding the broader burdens associated with complex probate proceedings.
Comprehensive legal service becomes necessary when evidence of intent is incomplete, inconsistent, or disputed by heirs or creditors. In such cases, a court may require extensive proof, formal discovery, or hearings to resolve competing claims. A broader approach may involve combining Heggstad petitions with probate filings or contested proceedings to protect beneficiary rights and address creditor claims. For Parkwood clients dealing with contested ownership, thorough preparation, advocacy, and procedural navigation are essential to achieve a resolution that reflects legal standards and protects legitimate interests.
When the decedent owned complex assets such as business interests, out-of-state real estate, or accounts with mixed ownership histories, resolving trust funding may require a comprehensive strategy. Multiple jurisdictions or tangled title issues can necessitate coordinated filings, additional documentation, and careful legal analysis to ensure assets are properly transferred. For Parkwood families, a comprehensive approach safeguards against oversights that could later lead to litigation or tax issues, ensuring that each asset is addressed in a manner consistent with the trust’s terms and relevant laws.
A comprehensive legal strategy addresses immediate title issues while considering long-term consequences such as taxation, creditor exposure, and beneficiary disputes. By fully evaluating each asset and potential claim, families can avoid future challenges that might arise from incomplete transfers. In Parkwood, this approach can provide more durable solutions, reduce the risk of later litigation, and ensure that distributions conform to the decedent’s broader estate planning goals. It also creates a clear administrative record that trustees and beneficiaries can rely upon during trust administration.
Comprehensive handling of trust funding can integrate Heggstad petitions with estate administration tasks like creditor notice, tax filings, and title transfers. This minimizes the chance that an overlooked detail will later undermine the trust’s objectives. For families, the investment in a full review and coordinated filings often results in lower long-term costs and more predictable outcomes. Residents of Parkwood benefit from a strategy that balances prompt resolution of funding gaps with careful attention to legal formalities, ultimately preserving the decedent’s wishes and promoting smoother distributions to beneficiaries.
A comprehensive approach reduces the chances that unresolved title or funding issues will lead to later disputes among beneficiaries or claims from creditors. By documenting the basis for transfers and securing court recognition where appropriate, families create a clearer record supporting the trust’s distributions. This clarity discourages challenges and helps trustees administer assets with confidence. In Parkwood, securing judicial acknowledgment through well-prepared petitions or coordinated filings can prevent expensive and disruptive litigation down the road, preserving both assets and family relationships.
Thorough legal preparation streamlines trust administration by addressing title defects, clarifying beneficiary rights, and consolidating assets under the trust’s control. This reduces administrative delays and helps trustees carry out distributions in accordance with the trust terms. For Parkwood clients, investing in comprehensive solutions up front means fewer surprises during administration, less time spent resolving unexpected claims, and a smoother execution of the settlor’s intentions. The result is a more predictable timeline and reduced overall cost in completing the estate plan.
Begin by collecting all documents that indicate the decedent’s intent to fund the trust, including the trust instrument, related correspondence, copies of transfer forms, and beneficiary designation statements. Statements indicating the settlor’s plan to place particular assets into the trust are especially helpful. Photographs of executed documents, bank records showing attempted transfers, and witness statements can strengthen the petition. In Parkwood cases, organizing this evidence chronologically and providing a concise explanation of each item helps the court evaluate the request efficiently and supports a persuasive presentation of intent.
Draft a petition that succinctly explains the asset’s history, the trust’s relevant provisions, and the direct evidence of the decedent’s intent. Attach supporting exhibits and propose a clear order for the court to enter. Avoid overly broad or ambiguous claims that might invite extensive litigation. A focused petition tailored to the disputed asset, supported by relevant documentary proof, often leads to faster rulings. In Parkwood, thoughtful drafting that anticipates potential questions improves the chances of a favorable and orderly resolution with minimal delay.
Families choose a Heggstad petition when they want to honor a decedent’s trust-based plan without undertaking a full probate administration. This petition can be more efficient and less public than probate, preserving privacy and reducing administrative burdens. It is particularly valuable when documentation demonstrates clear intent to fund the trust but formal retitling was not completed. For residents of Parkwood, a well-supported petition helps ensure assets are distributed according to the trust terms, minimizing delay for beneficiaries and preventing unnecessary court-supervised estate processes.
A Heggstad petition also helps avoid added costs associated with probate, such as prolonged court hearings and repeated accountings. By focusing on specific assets and presenting strong evidence, families can often secure court orders that place property into the trust without extensive litigation. This conserves estate value for beneficiaries and reduces emotional strain. Parkwood families who value privacy and an expedited process frequently find that pursuing a Heggstad petition aligns with their goals of efficient administration and faithful compliance with the decedent’s wishes.
Typical circumstances include recently created trusts that were not fully funded, oversight in transferring titles, or miscommunication about account ownership. Assets commonly involved are bank or brokerage accounts, real estate, and vehicles that remain in the decedent’s name despite a trust provision. Sometimes a settlor believed that beneficiary designations or joint ownership had completed funding, but records show otherwise. In Parkwood, families often seek a Heggstad petition after discovering such gaps while organizing affairs following a death, aiming to align asset titles with the established trust plan.
One frequent scenario is discovering that a bank account, brokerage account, or deed remained titled in the decedent’s name despite instructions in the trust. This may occur due to oversight, timing, or misunderstanding about what actions were needed to complete funding. When the trust document clearly designates the asset for the trust, a Heggstad petition can ask the court to treat the asset as trust property. For Parkwood families, correcting such oversights through a targeted petition helps preserve the settlor’s plan and avoids broader probate procedures.
Beneficiary designations that were intended to align with the trust but were not updated or were misapplied can create funding gaps. Accounts that still name the decedent or an outdated beneficiary may require court action to transfer to the trust. A Heggstad petition can address these situations when evidence demonstrates that the designation was meant to reflect the trust’s terms. For Madera County and Parkwood residents, ensuring beneficiary forms match the estate plan and pursuing corrective actions when they do not reduces the need for prolonged probate involvement.
Real property is commonly affected when deeds were not updated to reflect trust ownership before death. The intended transfer may have been postponed or the paperwork overlooked, leaving title in the decedent’s name. A Heggstad petition can request that the court recognize the property as trust-owned based on the trust document and supporting evidence. For families in Parkwood, addressing real estate through a petition helps avoid full probate and facilitates the trustee’s ability to manage or distribute property according to the trust’s provisions.
The Law Offices of Robert P. Bergman offers local representation and personal attention for Heggstad petitions and related trust matters in Parkwood and the surrounding areas. We assist with evidence gathering, drafting petitions, serving required notices, and presenting the case to the probate court. Our focus is on clear communication with trustees and beneficiaries so that each step in the process is well understood. Parkwood residents can rely on timely responses and practical guidance aimed at securing efficient outcomes while protecting the decedent’s estate planning objectives.
Clients turn to the Law Offices of Robert P. Bergman for thorough preparation and steady guidance through trust funding issues. We prioritize a careful review of the trust, related documents, and the facts surrounding any untransferred assets to craft a persuasive petition. Our team coordinates with trustees and beneficiaries to reduce conflict and expedite resolution. For Parkwood residents, having an attentive legal partner can make the difference in presenting the court with a coherent record and achieving a prompt ruling that respects the settlor’s intentions.
Our approach emphasizes clear documentation, timely filing, and respectful communication with all interested parties. We explain procedural steps, potential outcomes, and likely timelines so families can set realistic expectations and plan accordingly. When matters are disputed, we provide measured advocacy to protect beneficiary interests while seeking practical resolutions. For clients in Madera County, our familiarity with local court practices and procedural requirements helps streamline filings and reduce surprises during the petition process.
We also assist with related trust administration tasks that may arise after a successful Heggstad petition, such as transferring title, updating records, and advising trustees on distribution steps. This continuity helps ensure that the court’s decision smoothly converts into actionable changes in asset ownership and trust accounting. Parkwood families benefit from a comprehensive service that combines court petitions with follow-through on the administrative tasks necessary to complete the trust funding and administration process.
Our process begins with an initial review of the trust and the asset records to determine whether a Heggstad petition is appropriate. We then gather documentary evidence, prepare the petition and proposed order, and serve required notices on interested parties. If necessary, we represent your interests at a court hearing and follow up to ensure the court’s order results in proper title changes and updates to institutional records. Throughout the process we provide regular updates and practical guidance to help trustees and beneficiaries complete administration efficiently and in keeping with the decedent’s intent.
We begin by reviewing the trust, asset records, and any communications that bear on the settlor’s intent to fund the trust. This stage involves identifying the mis-titled assets, collecting transfer documents, bank and brokerage records, and statements from witnesses or the trustee that corroborate the trust plan. The goal is to assemble a coherent body of evidence that supports a focused petition. For Parkwood clients, a thorough initial review improves the likelihood of a prompt decision and reduces the need for extended court proceedings.
At this stage we examine the trust instrument and all relevant documentation to determine whether the available evidence supports a Heggstad petition. This includes county deed records, account statements, beneficiary forms, and any written communications indicating intent to fund. Identifying whether the asset was intended for the trust and why funding did not occur is central to the petition’s framing. For Parkwood matters, meticulous document review helps avoid omissions and ensures the petition addresses likely judicial questions directly and effectively.
When records alone do not fully tell the story, sworn declarations from trustees, family members, or professionals who assisted with the estate plan can provide crucial context. These statements describe conversations, instructions, and actions taken to effectuate trust funding. Corroborating evidence might also include notes, emails, or receipts linked to attempted transfers. For Parkwood clients, compiling such corroboration strengthens the petition and gives the court a fuller picture of the settlor’s intention to have the asset held in the trust.
Once evidence is in place we prepare a clear petition that outlines the facts, legal basis, and proposed order recognizing the asset as trust property. We include relevant exhibits and draft a proposed judgment for the court’s review. The filing must comply with local rules, including proper service on interested persons and required statutory notices. For Parkwood and Madera County clients, careful preparation at this stage reduces the risk of procedural delays and helps the court focus on the substantive issue of intent when deciding the petition.
The petition should be concise yet thorough, framing the asset’s history and the evidence that the decedent intended trust ownership. A proposed order helps the court see the precise relief requested. Including well-organized exhibits and a clear timeline of events aids judicial review. For Parkwood residents, a professionally prepared petition anticipates common procedural questions and streamlines court consideration, increasing the likelihood of an efficient and favorable ruling without unnecessary additional hearings.
Proper service and notification to beneficiaries, heirs, and other interested parties is essential to proceed. Failing to provide required notices can result in continuances or dismissal. We handle service logistics, prepare required declarations of service, and ensure that statutory periods for responses are observed. For families in Parkwood, adherence to these procedural steps helps prevent setbacks and establishes a firm procedural foundation for the court to evaluate the petition on its merits.
After filing, the court reviews the petition and may schedule a hearing. If the judge finds the evidence persuasive, the court will issue an order recognizing the asset as trust property. Following an order, we assist with implementing the transfer, updating institutional records, and completing any additional administrative tasks required by the trust. For Parkwood clients, these post-order steps ensure the court’s decision translates into concrete title changes so the trustee can manage or distribute the property consistent with the trust’s terms.
At any required hearing we present the documentary and testimonial evidence supporting the petition and respond to questions from the court. Our presentation emphasizes clarity about the settlor’s intent and the factual basis for treating the asset as trust property. If opposition arises, we address factual disputes and legal arguments aimed at protecting the trust’s interests. For Parkwood residents, competent representation during the hearing helps the court reach a resolution that accurately reflects the settlor’s documented intentions.
Once an order is entered we coordinate steps to effectuate the transfer, such as preparing deed transfers, providing the order to banks or brokers, and updating account registrations. We also counsel trustees on any required trust accounting, notifications, and follow-up actions. Ensuring that institutions accept and implement the court’s order prevents future title disputes and enables trustees to carry out distributions. For Parkwood clients, this final phase turns the legal victory into practical control of trust assets and completion of administration tasks.
A Heggstad petition is a court request to treat property as trust-owned when it remains titled in the decedent’s name despite the trust terms indicating otherwise. The petition asks the probate court to recognize the decedent’s intent to have the asset held by the trust, allowing title or control to pass to the trustee without a full probate proceeding. This remedy focuses on the intent demonstrated by the trust document and supporting evidence, offering a targeted path to correct funding oversights and align asset ownership with the settlor’s plan. Pursuing a Heggstad petition can expedite the process of bringing assets under trust control and reduce the administrative load on beneficiaries. Once the court finds the evidence sufficient, it can enter an order reflecting trust ownership and directing institutions to transfer or re-register assets. This avoids protracted probate steps for those specific assets, helping families preserve the decedent’s intentions while reducing public court involvement and potential delays in distribution.
Typical evidence includes the trust instrument, copies of account statements showing the asset in the decedent’s name, correspondence or notes indicating intent to fund the trust, and sworn declarations from trustees or witnesses who observed the settlor’s directions. Deeds, beneficiary designation forms, bank records, emails, and signed instructions that reference the trust are all potentially helpful. The court evaluates the totality of this material to determine whether a reasonable inference of intent to fund exists based on the available facts. When documentary proof is limited, corroborating declarations become particularly important. Witness statements can supply context about planning discussions or actions taken to fund the trust. The stronger and more consistent the evidence, the more likely the court will grant the petition. Preparing exhibits clearly and organizing the factual timeline helps the court assess the claim efficiently and increases the chance of a favorable outcome.
The timeline for resolving a Heggstad petition varies depending on court schedules, the complexity of the evidence, and whether interested parties contest the petition. In straightforward, uncontested matters with strong documentation, a petition can move relatively quickly through filing and review to a court order. Local calendars and required notice periods also affect timing, so the process may take several weeks to a few months in many cases. When disputes arise or additional discovery is necessary, resolution can take longer and may require one or more hearings. Preparing a focused petition with organized exhibits and anticipating common questions helps streamline the court’s review. For Parkwood and Madera County residents, early preparation and clear communication with the court and other parties can reduce unnecessary delays and improve predictability in timing.
Yes, beneficiaries or heirs may oppose a Heggstad petition if they believe the asset should remain part of the decedent’s probate estate or if they dispute the claimed intent. Opposition can introduce factual disagreements or legal arguments that the court must resolve, potentially requiring additional evidence, briefing, or hearings. In contested matters, the process becomes more adversarial and may extend the timeline and cost of resolving the ownership question. To minimize the risk of opposition, clear notice to interested parties and early engagement can be effective. When disputes cannot be resolved informally, the court weighs the competing evidence and determines whether the petitioner has met the legal standard to recognize the asset as trust property. Thoughtful preparation and documentation are essential to address and counter potential objections.
A successful Heggstad petition can remove specific assets from probate by securing a court order that recognizes those assets as trust property. However, it may not eliminate the need for probate for other assets that remain outside the trust or where disputes demand broader estate administration. The petition is a targeted remedy aimed at correcting individual funding oversights rather than a blanket replacement for probate in every situation. Families should review their entire estate plan to identify other assets that could trigger probate and take steps to align titles and designations with the trust. In many cases, using a Heggstad petition in combination with other administrative measures achieves a practical reduction in probate exposure while addressing the particular funding gaps at issue.
Costs associated with a Heggstad petition include court filing fees, costs of preparing and serving required notices, and legal fees for document review, petition drafting, and potential court appearances. If the matter is straightforward and uncontested, overall costs can be modest compared with full probate administration, because the focus is limited to specific assets and the supporting evidence. Additional expenses may arise if title corrections or institutional fees are needed to implement the court’s order. When disputes lead to contested hearings or discovery, costs increase accordingly due to added litigation time. Careful upfront preparation of the petition and thorough evidence gathering can reduce the likelihood of extended proceedings, helping families manage costs while pursuing a timely resolution of the funding issue.
Determining whether an asset should have been in the trust begins with reviewing the trust instrument and any contemporaneous documents or communications that discuss the settlor’s intentions. If the trust explicitly references the asset type or identifies the property by description, that is a strong indicator. Account statements, transfer attempts, and related correspondence also help clarify whether the settlor intended the asset for the trust. If uncertainty remains, witness declarations describing the settlor’s planning discussions or efforts to fund the trust can provide useful context. Legal review helps assess the strength of available evidence and whether a Heggstad petition is likely to succeed. For Parkwood residents, early evaluation of title and beneficiary designations reduces surprises after the settlor’s death.
After the court grants a Heggstad petition, it typically issues an order recognizing the asset as trust property. The next steps involve implementing the order with the institutions that hold the asset—such as banks, brokerage firms, or county recorders—so that title is updated or institutional records reflect trust ownership. This implementation step is essential to realize the practical benefits of the court’s decision and allow the trustee to manage the asset in accordance with the trust. We assist clients in presenting the court order to the relevant entities, preparing any necessary transfer documents, and verifying that institutions accept and record the changes. Completing these administrative tasks ensures the trust can function as intended and prevents future challenges concerning ownership or distributions to beneficiaries.
Alternatives to a Heggstad petition include pursuing probate administration for the asset, small estate procedures where applicable, or voluntary transfer mechanisms such as beneficiary designation updates if the institution permits. Each alternative has advantages and drawbacks; probate may be necessary when many assets are affected or when disputes cannot be resolved, while small estate procedures apply only in limited circumstances and for lower-value estates. Choosing the right path depends on the asset type, the clarity of the trust and supporting evidence, and whether interested parties agree. A legal review helps identify the least disruptive and most efficient remedy for transferring the asset to the intended beneficiaries or trust.
To avoid funding problems, families should review estate planning documents periodically and ensure titles, deeds, and beneficiary designations match the trust’s terms. When creating or updating a trust, follow through on funding steps such as retitling property, updating account registrations, and confirming beneficiary forms align with the trust. Clear written records of these actions reduce the chances of assets being left outside the trust at the settlor’s death. Working with counsel to create a funding checklist and periodically verifying account ownership can also prevent oversights. For Parkwood residents, proactive reviews and consistent follow-up on funding steps help preserve privacy, reduce probate exposure, and ensure the settlor’s intentions are realized without the need for corrective court petitions.
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