If you are administering a trust in Larkspur or Marin County and need the court to recognize distributions that occurred before a trust was formally funded, a Heggstad petition can be the legal tool to resolve that issue. This guide explains what a Heggstad petition is, why it may be necessary, and how the process typically unfolds under California law. Our firm, Law Offices of Robert P. Bergman, helps clients in San Jose, Larkspur, and throughout California navigate trust-related litigation and court filings while protecting beneficiaries and trustees during transitions and trust administration matters.
A Heggstad petition arises when assets were transferred to a trust informally or moved incorrectly and a trustee or beneficiary needs a court order validating those transfers to ensure clear title and proper administration. Many situations that prompt a Heggstad petition involve deeds, bank accounts, or retirement plans that were intended to be part of a trust but were never correctly titled. This page outlines the petition process, typical evidence required, potential outcomes, and considerations for trustees and beneficiaries in Larkspur and Marin County who want to regularize trust assets and prevent future disputes.
Filing a Heggstad petition can prevent future challenges to the transfer of assets and bring certainty to trust administration by securing court recognition of earlier informal transfers. When a trustee can present convincing proof that assets were intended for the trust, the court can declare those assets trust property, resolving title and distribution questions. For beneficiaries, the petition reduces the risk of later claims arising from unclear ownership. For trustees, it removes the cloud on property titles and allows for smoother management and distribution. A petition can also protect retirement accounts or real estate from being treated as part of the probate estate, preserving the settlor’s intentions.
Law Offices of Robert P. Bergman serves clients across California, including those in Larkspur and Marin County, handling trust administration, trust litigation, and estate planning matters such as Heggstad petitions. Our team focuses on careful factual investigation, meticulous document preparation, and practical courtroom advocacy when necessary. We work with trustees, beneficiaries, and family members to identify the strongest evidence that supports a claim that assets were always meant to belong to a trust. Communication, clear strategies, and efficient handling of court filings and related matters are central to our approach when resolving disputes and securing title confirmation for trust assets.
A Heggstad petition is a judicial proceeding in California where a trustee or beneficiary asks the court to determine whether certain property should be treated as trust property despite defects in the transfer process. The petition typically requires proof that the settlor intended the assets to be held in trust and that action was taken toward that end, even if formal title transfers were not completed correctly. These petitions often involve analysis of deeds, account records, correspondence, trust documents, and witness testimony to establish intent and steps taken to fund the trust. The court then evaluates whether equitable principles support recognizing the assets as trust property.
Because Heggstad petitions hinge on the settlor’s intent and the actions taken to transfer assets, evidence gathering is a key part of the process. The trustee must present contemporaneous documents, bank statements, deeds, or other records showing that transfers were made or intended. In some cases affidavits or testimony from people involved can fill gaps. The court weighs whether equity favors treating the property as part of the trust to carry out the settlor’s wishes. Outcomes can include formal recognition of assets as trust property, clarification of ownership, and instruction to correct title where appropriate.
A Heggstad petition is named after a California case that permits trustees or beneficiaries to ask the probate court to recognize assets as trust property when formal transfers were incomplete. The petition’s core objective is to honor the settlor’s intent and prevent unintended probate proceedings or ownership disputes. It is a legal remedy that reconciles equitable considerations with formal title requirements by allowing the court to look beyond defective paperwork when evidence shows the property was meant to belong to the trust. This tool helps ensure that trust administration proceeds according to the settlor’s plan and that beneficiaries receive what was intended.
A successful Heggstad petition generally requires establishing three basic elements: proof of the settlor’s intent to include the property in the trust, evidence that actions were taken to transfer or designate the property to the trust, and equitable grounds for the court to treat the property as trust assets despite formal defects. The process typically involves preparing a petition, compiling documentary evidence, serving interested parties, and presenting the case to the probate court. The court may hold hearings, consider declarations, and issue an order that clarifies title or directs corrective steps. Timely and thorough preparation is essential to support the requested relief.
Understanding the common terms used in Heggstad petitions helps trustees and beneficiaries know what to expect. This section defines essential vocabulary and procedural concepts found in trust litigation and probate court filings in California. Familiarity with these terms clarifies the objectives of a petition and the types of proof courts consider when deciding whether to recognize assets as trust property. The glossary entries that follow describe concepts that commonly appear in these matters, such as settlor intent, constructive trust, informal transfer, and probate proceedings, with plain-language explanations relevant to Larkspur residents.
Settlor intent refers to what the person who created the trust intended regarding ownership and distribution of assets. In Heggstad petition matters, showing the settlor’s intent is essential because the court will try to carry out those wishes when deciding whether an asset should be treated as part of the trust. Evidence of intent can include the trust document, letters, beneficiary designations, conversations documented in writing, or actions demonstrating the settlor intended certain property to be managed or distributed through the trust rather than through probate. Clear documentation strongly supports the requested relief.
An informal transfer occurs when assets were intended to be added to a trust but were never formally retitled or properly documented. Examples include a deed signed but not recorded, bank accounts with beneficiary designations that do not align with the trust, or assets moved without completing required paperwork. A Heggstad petition addresses these situations by asking the court to recognize that the asset belonged to the trust despite the informal or imperfect transfer. Courts will examine the totality of evidence to determine whether the informal transfer accomplished the settlor’s intent.
A constructive trust is an equitable remedy the court may use to prevent unjust enrichment when someone wrongfully holds property that should belong to another. In the context of trust administration and Heggstad petitions, a court might impose conditions or orders that function similarly to a constructive trust to ensure that property intended for the trust is treated accordingly. This term reflects the court’s ability to impose equitable solutions where formal title does not reflect the underlying intent and fairness requires recognition of trust ownership to honor the settlor’s plan.
Probate is the court-supervised process for distributing assets that are titled in an individual’s name at death, while trust administration handles assets held in a trust according to the trust document without probate. A Heggstad petition can be an important tool to keep intended trust assets out of probate by getting judicialrecognition that those assets already belonged to the trust. This distinction matters because trust administration typically proceeds more privately and can be faster and more economical than probate, aligning administration with the settlor’s wishes and minimizing court involvement for properly titled trust property.
When informal transfers or defective titling create uncertainty, parties may consider alternatives such as filing a Heggstad petition, pursuing a quiet title action, or initiating probate proceedings. A Heggstad petition is tailored to recognizing assets as trust property when the settlor’s intent and supporting actions can be shown. A quiet title suit addresses ownership disputes for real property more broadly but may not focus on trust intent. Probate may be unnecessary if the asset is recognized as part of the trust. Each route has different timelines, costs, and evidentiary standards, so selecting the most effective approach depends on the facts and the desired outcome for beneficiaries and trustees.
A limited filing, such as a narrowly focused petition or declaration, may be adequate when contemporaneous documents clearly show the settlor intended the asset to be held in trust and the transfer was merely procedural. Bank statements, signed deeds bearing the settlor’s name, beneficiary designations referencing the trust, or correspondence indicating the settlor’s plan can often allow the court to recognize the asset without prolonged litigation. In such cases, efficient presentation of the documentary record can secure an order clarifying title and allow trustees to proceed with administration without resorting to broader, more expensive actions.
If all interested parties agree about the settlor’s intent and are willing to support a petition, a limited approach may resolve the matter quickly and with minimal contention. Consent and clear evidence reduce the need for contested hearings and can lead to an uncontested court order confirming that the asset belongs to the trust. When beneficiaries and potential opponents are aligned, the court can often enter relief based on joint declarations and documentary proof, saving time and expense while restoring clear title for the trustee to manage and distribute the property in accordance with the trust.
A comprehensive legal approach is often necessary when beneficiaries or third parties oppose recognition of assets as trust property, raising contested issues about the settlor’s intent or alleging wrongdoing. In such circumstances, the matter can require depositions, expert valuation, complex legal briefing, and courtroom hearings to resolve disputes. Preparing a thorough record, anticipating challenges from opponents, and coordinating legal strategy across different jurisdictions or related estate matters can protect the trustee and beneficiaries from adverse rulings and ensure the court fully understands the evidence supporting trust ownership.
Complex situations, such as transfers involving real estate across county lines, retirement accounts with incomplete beneficiary designations, or assets subject to liens and creditors, can complicate a Heggstad petition. A comprehensive plan addresses these multiple layers by coordinating title corrections, resolving creditor claims, and integrating related trust or probate actions. This often requires careful negotiation, ancillary filings, and possibly coordination with financial institutions or title companies to ensure that the court’s order can be implemented effectively and that trust administration proceeds without leaving unresolved legal or practical obstacles.
A comprehensive approach reduces the risk of later disputes by addressing all related legal and practical issues that might undermine recognition of property as trust assets. By gathering a complete record, resolving creditor or lien concerns, and coordinating corrective title work, trustees and beneficiaries gain greater certainty that assets will be treated according to the trust terms. A thorough strategy also promotes clear communication among interested parties, reduces the chance of surprise claims, and often results in a durable court order that minimizes the need for future litigation over the same asset.
Comprehensive handling can also streamline administration by anticipating follow-on steps needed to implement the court’s order, such as recording corrected deeds or updating account registrations. This full-service perspective helps ensure efficient transfer and distribution and preserves value by minimizing delays. Trustees benefit from clear instructions and reduced personal exposure by obtaining authoritative court rulings. Beneficiaries benefit from predictable outcomes and timely access to distributions envisioned by the settlor, supporting family peace and minimizing administrative friction during what can already be an emotional process.
When courts issue orders recognizing assets as trust property after a comprehensive presentation, the resulting clarity reduces the likelihood of future contest. That finality helps trustees to act confidently when managing or distributing property, reduces administrative friction, and protects beneficiaries’ interests. A comprehensive approach that leaves no loose ends—such as unresolved liens or inconsistent beneficiary records—reduces the chance that a third party can later assert a competing claim, making administration smoother and more efficient for everyone involved in the trust’s affairs.
By securing judicial recognition that assets belong to the trust, a comprehensive approach helps avoid unnecessary probate proceedings, which can be time-consuming, public, and expensive. Keeping assets in trust can preserve privacy and streamline distribution in accordance with the settlor’s plan. Addressing related legal obstacles proactively also helps control costs by reducing the need for piecemeal litigation or repeated court filings. When the court authoritatively confirms trust ownership, trustees can implement the trust plan efficiently and reduce administrative overhead for beneficiaries.
Gather and preserve all documents that reflect the settlor’s intention to fund the trust, including drafts of trust documents, signed deeds, account statements, emails, and letters. Consistent documentation makes it easier to show the court that transfers were intended even if formal title work was not completed. Also record any contemporaneous communications or receipts that show steps were taken to move assets into the trust. Clear evidence of intent and action can be the deciding factor when the court evaluates a petition, and a well-organized record supports a smoother, more persuasive presentation.
Evaluate whether there are liens, creditor claims, or recording issues that could interfere with recognition and enforcement of a court order. Identifying and resolving these matters beforehand makes the court’s instruction easier to implement and reduces the risk of post-order complications. Coordinating with title companies, financial institutions, and lienholders to clear encumbrances or to document their positions can help ensure that once the court recognizes the asset as trust property, the trustee can transfer or manage it without additional legal hurdles.
Consider a Heggstad petition whenever there is credible evidence that assets were intended to be part of a trust but were not properly retitled or recorded. Typical scenarios include deeds that were signed but not recorded, bank or brokerage accounts with inconsistent registration, or retirement accounts with beneficiary designations that conflict with trust planning. If ambiguity about ownership could result in probate, delays, or disputes among beneficiaries, a petition can secure judicial recognition that the assets belong to the trust and allow administration to proceed according to the settlor’s wishes.
Another reason to consider this remedy is when trustees face practical obstacles in managing or distributing trust property because title defects create legal uncertainty or exposure. By obtaining a court order that clarifies ownership, trustees reduce personal liability and can act with confidence. If family members disagree about whether assets were transferred to the trust, early filing can prevent escalation into wider litigation and help preserve estate assets. A Heggstad petition is a focused way to ensure that the settlor’s intent governs the handling of disputed assets.
Common circumstances include deeds prepared but not recorded, bank accounts that a settlor intended to move into a trust but kept in personal name, and retirement accounts with beneficiary designations that do not match trust instructions. Other instances involve property transfers made shortly before death or informal arrangements where family members relied on the settlor’s directive without completing paperwork. In each case, the court may be asked to recognize the asset as part of the trust to carry out the settlor’s plan and avoid probate or property disputes among heirs and beneficiaries.
A common trigger for a Heggstad petition is real property where the deed was never properly recorded in the name of the trust, leaving title in the settlor’s individual name. This situation can arise from oversight, misunderstanding of recording requirements, or delays during estate planning. The petition asks the court to recognize that the settlor intended the property to be owned by the trust and to direct appropriate corrective action so the trustee can manage or distribute the property according to the trust terms without engaging probate procedures.
Sometimes accounts were intended to be transferred to a trust but remain in the settlor’s name due to account transfer procedures or timing. This leaves a question whether those assets should be administered under the trust or through probate. A Heggstad petition collects evidence showing the settlor’s intent and actions toward trust transfer, seeking court recognition that the accounts should be treated as trust property. A favorable ruling simplifies administration and aligns asset management with the settlor’s estate plan.
Retirement accounts sometimes present complications when beneficiary designations do not match instructions in estate planning documents or when the intended trust designation was not completed. When a settlor clearly intended for benefits to pass to a trust, a Heggstad petition can help reconcile the discrepancy by demonstrating intent and asking the court to treat the proceeds as trust property. Resolving these matters judicially can prevent disputes and clarify distribution in accordance with the settlor’s objectives.
Law Offices of Robert P. Bergman assists Larkspur residents with petitions that confirm trust ownership and resolve titling issues. We guide trustees and beneficiaries through evidence gathering, petition drafting, and court presentation, and we liaise with title companies or financial institutions as needed to implement court orders. Our goal is to secure recognition of trust assets efficiently while minimizing conflict and delay. Whether the matter is straightforward or contested, we focus on producing a clear record that respects the settlor’s intent and helps trustees fulfill their duties under California trust and probate law.
Our practice with trust administration and related court filings provides a practical, organized approach to Heggstad petitions and other trust matters. We emphasize careful document review to identify and assemble the strongest evidence of the settlor’s intent, and we communicate options clearly to trustees and beneficiaries. Clients benefit from hands-on assistance with title work coordination, creditor resolution, and court filings, which reduces administrative burdens and helps move the matter toward a definitive court order recognizing trust assets where appropriate.
We assist clients across Marin County and the broader Bay Area, offering in-person consultations and courthouse representation when needed. Our focus is on timely resolution, protecting the trust’s value, and reducing the likelihood of costly future disputes. We work to preserve family relationships when possible by encouraging open communication and mediated solutions where appropriate, but we are prepared to present a complete factual record to the court when contested matters must be resolved through formal proceedings.
Clients often appreciate our thorough preparation and clear roadmaps for corrective steps after a favorable order, such as recording deeds or updating account registrations. We strive to make the post-order implementation practical and efficient to ensure trustees can carry out distributions and management responsibilities smoothly. Contacting us early when titling issues are discovered provides the best chance to assemble strong evidence and pursue the most cost-effective route to recognition of trust assets.
Our process begins with a thorough review of the trust documents, deeds, account records, beneficiary designations, and any correspondence reflecting the settlor’s intent. We identify gaps and conduct targeted discovery to obtain missing records when necessary. After gathering and organizing evidence, we prepare the petition and supporting declarations, serve notice to interested parties, and represent the client at hearings. We also coordinate with title companies or financial institutions to ensure the court’s order can be implemented, providing comprehensive follow-through so trustees can administer the trust effectively after the court’s decision.
The first step focuses on assembling existing documentation and identifying what additional records or testimony may be needed to prove the settlor’s intent. We review the trust instrument, deeds, account statements, escrow records, beneficiary forms, and any communications that point to a plan to fund the trust. We also interview relevant witnesses and request records from institutions to build a chronological, organized case file. This preparation sets the foundation for a persuasive petition and helps determine whether a limited filing or a broader litigation strategy is appropriate given the facts.
Creating a clear timeline of events and collecting primary documents about transfers and settlor intent is essential. We work to piece together when actions were taken, who was involved, and what steps remained incomplete. This timeline offers a concise factual narrative the court can rely on when evaluating the petition. A detailed chronology also helps identify witnesses, bank transaction records, and other evidence that fills gaps and supports the conclusion that the assets were meant to be part of the trust.
We obtain necessary records from banks, title companies, and other institutions and prepare declarations or affidavits from the trustee, family members, or third parties who can attest to the settlor’s intent and acts taken. These sworn statements, combined with documentary proof, form the backbone of the petition. Careful drafting of declarations helps the court understand both the factual and equitable reasons to recognize the asset as trust property, increasing the likelihood of securing the desired ruling without unnecessary delay.
Once the petition and supporting documents are prepared, we file them with the appropriate probate court and ensure that all required parties receive proper notice. Service procedures and timelines are critical to the process and must comply with California probate rules. We also evaluate whether any temporary relief is needed pending a full hearing. Clear and accurate filing reduces the chance of procedural challenges and helps the court schedule a hearing promptly so the matter can be resolved without protracted delay.
The petition sets out the legal and factual basis for recognizing property as trust assets, and supporting memoranda explain applicable law and equitable principles. We tailor the petition to the specific circumstances, highlighting documentary proof and declarations that demonstrate the settlor’s intent and the actions taken to transfer the property. Clear legal argumentation helps the court see why a Heggstad order is warranted and anticipates common defenses or objections that interested parties might raise.
Ensuring that all required notices are given to beneficiaries, heirs, and other interested parties is essential to avoid jurisdictional or procedural problems. We manage service of process, prepare proof of service, and address any questions about who must be notified under California probate rules. Proper notice gives interested parties an opportunity to respond, while demonstrating to the court that the petition was filed in compliance with procedural requirements and that the matter can proceed to be decided on its merits.
After filing and service, the court will schedule a hearing where the parties can present evidence and argument. If the court finds the settlor intended the assets to be part of the trust, it may issue an order recognizing the asset as trust property and directing corrective steps such as recording a deed or updating account registration. We assist with implementing the order, coordinating with title companies or financial institutions, and preparing any additional documents needed to reflect the corrected ownership and close the matter for trustees and beneficiaries.
At the hearing, the court will consider the documentary record and witness declarations supporting the petition. We present a clear factual narrative, highlight key pieces of evidence, and address potential contrary arguments. The hearing is an opportunity to show the court how the settlor’s intent aligns with trust administration and why equitable relief is appropriate. A well-organized presentation can help secure the order needed to confirm that assets are trust property and reduce the risk of further challenges after the court issues its ruling.
Once the court issues an order recognizing the assets as trust property, practical steps follow to implement the ruling. This often includes recording corrected deeds, updating account registrations, or coordinating with title companies and financial institutions to reflect the trust as owner. We assist trustees with these implementation steps to ensure the court’s order is effective in practice and that assets are accessible for management and distribution under the trust, thereby reducing the prospect of further disputes or procedural complications.
A Heggstad petition is a probate court filing under California law that asks the court to recognize property as trust assets when formal title transfer procedures were incomplete. It is commonly used when deeds were not recorded, accounts remained in the settlor’s name, or beneficiary designations conflict with trust instructions, and the petitioner wants the court to honor the settlor’s intent. The petition presents documentary evidence and sworn declarations showing that the settlor intended the property to be part of the trust and that equitable relief is appropriate to carry out those wishes. The court examines the totality of evidence and may issue an order declaring the property to be owned by the trust, directing corrective steps, or addressing related issues like liens. This process helps prevent unintended probate and clarifies ownership so trustees can manage or distribute assets according to the trust document. The goal is to align legal title with the settlor’s plan while protecting interested parties’ rights.
The timing for resolving a Heggstad petition varies depending on the complexity of the case, the completeness of the evidence, and whether the petition is contested. When all documents are in order and interested parties are cooperative, the process can be resolved in a matter of weeks to a few months, allowing time for filing, service, and a court hearing. More complex or contested matters that require discovery, depositions, or multiple hearings can extend the timeline significantly and may take many months to resolve. Local court calendars, service requirements, and the need to coordinate records from banks or title companies also affect timing. Early planning, thorough evidence collection, and clear communication with interested parties often speed the process and reduce the risk of prolonged litigation.
The most persuasive evidence for a Heggstad petition includes contemporaneous documents showing the settlor’s intent, such as the trust instrument itself, signed deeds, account statements reflecting transfers, beneficiary designation forms referencing the trust, and correspondence or notes indicating plans to transfer assets. Declarations from trustees or witnesses who observed the settlor’s actions or instructions can support the documentary record and help the court understand the context of transfers. Transaction records, escrow instructions, and bank communications that corroborate actions toward funding the trust are especially helpful. Courts are more likely to grant recognition when the evidence forms a consistent narrative that the settlor intended the property to be part of the trust and took steps to accomplish that result despite imperfect titling.
Yes, a favorable Heggstad ruling can prevent assets from entering probate by establishing that they were trust property at the settlor’s death. When the court recognizes the property as part of the trust, it affirms that the trustee—not the probate court—has authority to manage and distribute the asset under the trust terms. This preserves privacy and can speed transfers to beneficiaries according to the settlor’s plan rather than through a probate administration. However, achieving this outcome depends on the strength of the evidence presented and whether interested parties contest the petition. Proper notice, careful preparation, and resolving related issues like liens or creditor claims help ensure the court’s order is implementable and keeps assets within the trust framework.
California probate rules require that all interested parties be notified when a petition affecting trust property is filed. Interested parties typically include beneficiaries named in the trust, heirs who might inherit through intestacy, trustees, and other persons who have a legal interest in the property. Proper service ensures that those parties have an opportunity to respond and raise objections if they disagree with the requested relief. Failure to notify required parties can lead to procedural problems or delays, so careful attention to service rules is essential. We help identify who should be served, arrange proper notice, and prepare proofs of service to comply with court requirements and move the petition forward without jurisdictional issues.
Failing to address titling issues can leave property vulnerable to probate, creditor claims, or disputes among family members and beneficiaries. Assets that were intended to be held in trust but remain in the settlor’s name may be treated as part of the probate estate, causing delays, additional expense, and public proceedings that the trust intended to avoid. Unresolved title defects can also make trustees reluctant to manage or distribute property due to potential personal liability. Timely action through a Heggstad petition or other appropriate legal steps helps prevent these risks by seeking judicial recognition of the trust’s ownership interest and clarifying the path for administration and distribution. Early intervention often reduces costs and preserves the settlor’s wishes.
In some cases a trustee can request temporary or interim relief from the court while a Heggstad petition is pending, such as permission to take preservation steps, manage property, or take other actions needed to protect trust assets. The availability of temporary relief depends on the facts and whether the court finds immediate action necessary to prevent harm to the assets or interests of beneficiaries. Properly framed requests and persuasive supporting declarations increase the likelihood of obtaining interim measures. Temporary relief can include orders allowing maintenance, payment of necessary expenses, or limited transfers needed to preserve value. Seeking such measures requires careful pleading and evidence to show that delay would cause prejudice to the trustee or beneficiaries, and that the requested interim relief is appropriate under the circumstances.
Not all Heggstad petitions require a contested hearing if the petition is supported by strong documentary evidence and no interested parties oppose the relief. When the filing is uncontested, courts may grant relief based on declarations and documents submitted with the petition. However, if any interested party objects or additional factual issues arise, the court will schedule a hearing to resolve disputes and weigh testimony and evidence. Even in uncontested matters, the court reviews the record and may request further information or clarification. Being prepared for a hearing and assembling a complete evidentiary record improves the chances of a prompt ruling even when opposition is anticipated.
When beneficiaries disagree during a Heggstad petition, the court considers the evidence and arguments presented by all sides to determine whether the settlor intended the property to be part of the trust. Disputes may involve differing interpretations of documents, competing claims about actions taken to transfer assets, or allegations about undue influence or lack of capacity. The litigation process allows the parties to present declarations, documentary evidence, and testimony to resolve these conflicts under court supervision. Mediation or negotiation can sometimes resolve disagreements without a full hearing, and courts often welcome cooperative solutions. When resolution through agreement is not possible, the court’s decision will bind the parties and clarify ownership, enabling trustees to proceed with administration based on the court’s order.
After the court grants a Heggstad petition, the order typically sets forth recognition that the asset is trust property and may direct specific corrective steps such as recording a deed, updating account registration, or notifying financial institutions. The trustee then implements these actions so the property is properly titled in the trust’s name and can be managed or distributed according to the trust terms. This implementation ensures the court’s decision has practical effect and that assets are usable for trust administration. If any third parties need to be presented with the court’s order, we coordinate with title companies, banks, or account custodians to ensure the order is recorded or accepted and that any remaining procedural steps are completed. Proper follow-through reduces the risk of future disputes and helps conclude the matter efficiently for beneficiaries and trustees.
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