A Heggstad petition is a legal proceeding used in California to treat assets as if they had been properly transferred into a trust when a transfer was intended but not completed before someone passed away. This guide explains how a Heggstad petition can help resolve title or deed issues so that the decedent’s wishes for their trust are honored and probate involvement is minimized. If you are facing property that should have been in a trust but remains in the deceased person’s name, understanding this petition can clarify options for beneficiaries and trustees and reduce uncertainty about estate distribution.
Many families discover after a death that certain assets were intended for a trust but were never retitled or transferred, creating confusion and delay. A Heggstad petition seeks a judicial determination that assets titled in the decedent’s name were meant to be trust property, allowing those assets to pass according to the trust’s terms rather than through probate. This process often saves time and expense and preserves privacy compared with full probate. We provide a careful explanation of when a petition is appropriate, how evidence is gathered, and what outcomes families can expect when pursuing this remedy in California courts.
A Heggstad petition can be an important tool to ensure that a deceased person’s estate plan is carried out as intended when paperwork or title transfers were incomplete. By establishing that assets were meant to be held in a trust, the petition reduces the need for formal probate administration for those items, helping beneficiaries gain access to property more quickly. The proceeding can preserve privacy, avoid additional court fees tied to probate, and support efficient settlement of trust assets. Careful documentation and testimony are typically required to demonstrate intent, which is why a thoughtful, well-structured filing matters in achieving a favorable result.
The Law Offices of Robert P. Bergman serve clients in San Clemente and throughout California with focused estate planning and trust administration services. Our team combines years of practical courtroom and transactional experience with a commitment to clear communication, guiding families through contested titles, trust interpretation questions, and filings such as Heggstad petitions. We prioritize thoughtful preparation of documentation and evidence, working collaboratively with trustees and beneficiaries to present a persuasive factual record to the court. Our approach aims to resolve matters efficiently while protecting family assets and honoring the decedent’s written and demonstrated intentions.
A Heggstad petition asks the court to treat certain assets as trust property when the person who created the trust clearly intended those assets to be transferred into the trust but the formal transfer did not occur. Common situations include deeds that were not recorded, accounts that were not retitled, or assets purchased with trust funds but never titled in the trust’s name. The petition compiles evidence such as trust documents, transfer attempts, payment records, and witness testimony to establish the decedent’s intent and to provide the court with a basis for recharacterizing ownership to align with the trust.
The Heggstad petition process is fact-driven and can vary depending on the property type and the strength of evidence regarding intent. The court evaluates whether the trust maker intended the asset to belong to the trust and whether actions taken before death support that intent. Outcomes can include the court directing that title be treated as held by the trust or ordering related relief to carry out the trust maker’s plan. Because each situation has unique factual nuances, careful evidence gathering and a clear presentation of the trust maker’s actions and statements are essential to achieving a favorable ruling.
A Heggstad petition is a specific California legal remedy named after a court decision that permits a judge to declare property to be trust assets even if formal transfer paperwork was not completed. The petition explains the factual basis for treating the asset as trust property, provides copies of the trust and related documents, and includes declarations from witnesses or involved parties that attest to the trust maker’s intent. The court examines whether the totality of evidence demonstrates an intent to transfer the asset to the trust and, if satisfied, the judge may issue an order aligning title and distribution with the trust’s terms.
Successful Heggstad petitions typically rest on clear documentation of intent, evidence of administrative steps taken to transfer or designate the asset to the trust, and consistent statements or behavior by the trust maker supporting the alleged transfer. Evidence can include signed but unrecorded deeds, trust-related purchase records, beneficiary designations, and declarations from caregivers, advisors, or family members. The filing must articulate the legal basis for recharacterization and propose specific relief for the court. Thorough preparation includes collecting all relevant documents, anticipating potential challenges, and drafting declarations that address likely factual disputes.
Understanding the terminology used in Heggstad petitions and trust administration helps clients evaluate their options and participate meaningfully in the process. Terms frequently encountered include trust maker, trustee, beneficiary, title, deed, probate, and constructive trust. Familiarity with these concepts clarifies how assets move from individual ownership to trust ownership and what judicial relief seeks to accomplish. We provide plain-language explanations so trustees and beneficiaries can understand filings, evidence requirements, and likely outcomes. Clear definitions reduce confusion when families are navigating post-death property disputes and trust administration steps.
The trust maker is the person who creates the trust and establishes its terms for distributing assets during life and after death. The trust maker’s expressed intentions, documented in trust instruments and supported by actions like funding the trust or signing deeds, are central to a Heggstad petition because the court considers those intentions when deciding whether assets should be treated as trust property. Statements, records, and the trust maker’s conduct can provide the factual basis to show that the trust maker intended property to belong to the trust, even if a transfer was not completed before death.
A constructive trust is an equitable remedy the court may impose to prevent unjust enrichment when one party holds property that, in fairness, should benefit another under a trust or agreement. In Heggstad-related matters, the concept can arise when the court determines title did not reflect the true ownership intentions and orders that the asset be treated as held for the trust’s beneficiaries. The remedy focuses on aligning legal recognition with the decedent’s intent so assets are distributed according to the trust rather than through estate procedures that would contradict that intent.
Trust funding refers to the act of transferring assets into a trust so that the trust holds legal title and can administer those assets according to the trust maker’s instructions. Funding may involve recording deeds, changing account registrations, or designating trusts on beneficiary forms. Incomplete funding is a common reason Heggstad petitions are filed; the petition seeks a court determination that funding was effectively intended despite the absence of completed formalities. Demonstrating funding attempts and related evidence helps the court confirm that the trust maker wanted the trust to control those assets.
Probate avoidance describes the efforts and legal mechanisms used to keep assets out of probate court, allowing distribution according to a trust or other non-probate devices. Heggstad petitions support probate avoidance by enabling courts to recognize assets as trust property even if paperwork was incomplete, which can prevent additional probate administration for those assets. Avoiding probate can reduce public disclosure, save time, and limit certain fees, but a Heggstad filing requires careful demonstration of intent and supporting evidence to persuade the court to align formal title with the trust maker’s plan.
When assets intended for a trust remain titled in the decedent’s name, families typically weigh filing a Heggstad petition against opening a probate proceeding. Probate formally administers an estate under court supervision but can be time-consuming, public, and costly. A Heggstad petition asks the court to treat specific assets as trust property, allowing those items to be handled under the trust’s private administration. Determining the best route depends on the asset types involved, evidence of intent, potential creditor claims, and the family’s desire for privacy and efficiency. Each option has trade-offs that are best evaluated in light of the facts and available documentation.
A limited approach, such as a focused petition to recognize particular assets as trust property, is often sufficient when documentation and witness statements clearly show the trust maker intended to place those assets in the trust. Examples include unrecorded deeds that were signed and dated in conjunction with trust planning, bank or mortgage records showing trust funds used for purchases, or beneficiary designations made contemporaneously with the trust. When the factual record is strong and uncontested, a narrow court order can resolve title issues without the broader administration and formalities of probate court, saving time and resources.
A limited approach may also be appropriate when only a small number of assets are affected and the remainder of the estate is already properly organized or small enough to handle informally. If the assets at issue are readily documented and do not involve complex creditor or tax issues, a Heggstad petition targeting specific titles can be efficient. The petition can provide precise relief for those items, allowing trustees to administer the trust with minimal intrusion. This approach reduces court involvement and often accelerates distribution to beneficiaries for the assets in question.
A comprehensive legal approach becomes necessary when there are competing claims to assets, ambiguous or conflicting evidence about the trust maker’s intent, or disputes among potential beneficiaries. In such situations, resolving the matter may require broader discovery, formal notice to interested parties, additional filings, and potentially contested hearings. A broader strategy ensures thorough collection of records, careful preparation for court testimony, and coordination of steps to protect the trust and its beneficiaries while addressing objections and potential creditor assertions. The goal is to secure a clear court resolution that withstands challenges.
When the estate includes varied asset types such as real property, retirement accounts, business interests, or intangible assets with differing transfer formalities, a comprehensive approach is often required. Complex title issues, missing documentation, or assets tied to third parties can complicate a narrow petition and may require coordinated action across different legal and administrative areas. A broader plan helps ensure each asset receives appropriate treatment, any necessary filings are made in the correct venues, and related matters like creditor claims or tax considerations are addressed to protect the trust’s integrity and beneficiaries’ interests.
A comprehensive approach to resolving funding gaps and title issues can reduce the risk of future challenges and provide a clearer, consolidated path to final distribution. By addressing all related assets, potential claims, and procedural requirements together, families can avoid piecemeal litigation that creates inconsistent outcomes. A coordinated strategy enables thorough fact gathering, consistent legal arguments across filings, and more predictable timelines. This can ultimately protect beneficiaries, preserve the intended allocation of assets, and minimize the chance of later disputes arising from unresolved or partially addressed matters.
Comprehensive handling also supports efficient communication with third parties such as title companies, financial institutions, and courts, reducing delays caused by repeated clarifications or multiple separate filings. When the full picture is presented at once, decision-makers can understand the trust maker’s plan and the reasons for granting relief that aligns title with the trust. This approach often results in fewer surprises, lower cumulative costs compared with multiple disputes, and a more orderly administration process that benefits trustees and beneficiaries seeking to finalize distribution consistent with the trust’s terms.
A key advantage of a comprehensive approach is achieving a durable resolution that makes future relitigation less likely. When courts have the full record and all interested parties have been notified and had an opportunity to be heard, the resulting orders carry greater weight and provide a clearer basis for concluding the matter. This reduces the chance that another party will successfully reopen the issue later. Comprehensive preparation and presentation to the court help secure finality, provide certainty for beneficiaries, and allow trustees to move forward with administration and distribution with more confidence.
By consolidating related matters into a focused plan, clients often reduce cumulative legal and administrative costs compared with addressing each issue separately. A single, well-supported petition or coordinated set of filings can streamline court processes, reduce duplicated effort in fact gathering, and shorten overall timelines. This efficiency benefits trustees and beneficiaries by accelerating access to assets and limiting prolonged family stress. While upfront preparation may be more thorough, the net effect commonly is a more cost-effective and timely path to resolving title defects and completing trust administration.
Begin by collecting every document related to the trust and any attempted transfers: the trust instrument, deeds, escrow statements, closing documents, bank records showing trust funds used for a purchase, closing instructions, and beneficiary designation forms. Statements from individuals involved in the trust maker’s planning, such as a trusted advisor or family member who witnessed transfer-related actions, can be valuable. The more complete the record showing intent and administrative steps taken toward transfer, the stronger the petition’s factual foundation will be when presented to the court and when addressing potential objections from other interested parties.
While pursuing a Heggstad petition for a particular asset, review other estate and trust documents for additional unfinished transfers or related administrative issues. Identifying and addressing multiple items together can avoid repeated filings and reduce overall costs. Ensure beneficiary designations on retirement accounts and life insurance are consistent with the trust plan, and confirm whether special documents like certifications of trust or pour-over wills are in place. A comprehensive review helps prevent downstream disputes, provides a full factual picture to the court, and supports a more efficient, complete resolution of the trust maker’s intentions.
Families consider a Heggstad petition when assets intended for a trust remain titled in the decedent’s name, creating uncertainty about distribution and potentially exposing assets to probate. The petition can realign title with the trust’s terms, enabling those assets to be administered privately and according to the trust. When timely action is taken, beneficiaries can avoid longer probate proceedings for the impacted assets and secure distribution that reflects the decedent’s plan. Consideration typically follows an assessment of the strength of documentary evidence and whether competing claims or creditor issues might complicate the process.
Other reasons to pursue a Heggstad petition include reducing public disclosure of asset details, decreasing the administrative burden on beneficiaries, and resolving disputes that might otherwise develop into protracted litigation. In many situations, courts are willing to grant precise relief when the factual record supports the trust maker’s intent and when interested parties are properly informed. Promptly evaluating documentation and choosing a strategy that balances speed, cost, and finality can preserve estate value and help families move forward with fewer legal hurdles.
Typical circumstances include deeds that were signed but not recorded, property acquired with trust funds but titled in the deceased person’s name, and bank or brokerage accounts intended for the trust that were never retitled. Other triggers include transfers interrupted by illness or death before final recording, or administrative oversights during estate planning updates. When these factual patterns are present, a Heggstad petition can reclassify those assets to align with the trust maker’s plan. Recognition of such patterns early helps avoid unnecessary probate administration for assets that the decedent intended to be managed under the trust.
An unrecorded deed that shows the trust maker’s intention to transfer property into a trust is a classic example prompting a Heggstad petition. Even when a deed was signed but never recorded, the totality of evidence—like escrow paperwork, payment history from trust funds, and contemporaneous statements—can support a finding that the property was meant to be trust-owned. The petition asks the court to recognize that intent and to direct that the property be treated accordingly, allowing trustees to administer it under the trust terms and avoiding probate for that asset specifically.
When a property purchase was funded with trust assets or intended to be held in the trust but title remained in the deceased person’s name, a Heggstad petition can be used to align legal title with the trust. Documentation such as payment records, loan documents, and closing statements that show trust funds were used, along with trust-related directives, supports the claim that the trust maker intended ownership by the trust. The court can then order relief that treats the property as trust property so beneficiaries receive the intended distributions.
Accounts such as bank, investment, or brokerage accounts that were intended for trust ownership but never retitled can create administration problems after death. A Heggstad petition can address accounts where the trust maker clearly intended trust ownership yet administrative steps were not completed. Evidence may include trust planning documents, correspondence with financial institutions about retitling, and records showing efforts to change registrations. Securing a court determination that such accounts belong to the trust helps ensure those assets are distributed according to the trust’s provisions rather than through probate procedures.
The Law Offices of Robert P. Bergman assist clients throughout San Clemente and Orange County with Heggstad petitions and related trust administration matters. Our team helps gather documents, prepare declarations, coordinate with title companies and financial institutions, and file petitions that present a clear factual basis for treating assets as trust property. We understand local court procedures and the practical steps required to obtain orders needed to align title and trust administration so families can finalize distribution in accordance with the trust maker’s intentions.
Clients rely on our firm for careful legal preparation, attention to detail in document collection, and a practical approach to resolving incomplete trust funding. We prioritize clear communication, explaining the legal steps and likely timelines so clients understand what to expect. Our goal is to present a coherent, evidence-based petition that addresses the court’s concerns and seeks appropriate relief to honor the trust maker’s plan. We work to resolve matters efficiently while protecting beneficiaries’ interests and minimizing unnecessary legal expense and delay.
We take a collaborative approach with trustees, beneficiaries, and other stakeholders to ensure all necessary information is considered and submitted properly. This includes coordinating with title companies, financial institutions, and third-party witnesses to assemble the strongest possible record. Where disputes arise, we focus on practical resolution strategies that prioritize the trust maker’s intended outcomes while complying with court procedures. Our goal is to achieve durable orders that facilitate private administration under the trust and limit the scope of court intervention where possible.
Accessibility and responsiveness are central to our service. We provide clear updates at key stages of the petition process and answer questions about potential implications for beneficiaries, creditors, and other interested parties. For many families, timely and transparent handling of title and trust issues provides peace of mind during an otherwise stressful period. We aim to make the legal process predictable and manageable, helping families move forward with confidence that the trust maker’s wishes will be respected to the fullest extent allowed by law.
Our process begins with an initial review of the trust documents and the asset records to determine whether a Heggstad petition is appropriate and likely to succeed. We compile all relevant documentation, prepare declarations from witnesses and parties, and draft the petition to present a clear factual narrative. We then handle court filings, serve interested parties as required, and represent the case at hearings. Throughout, we focus on building a coherent record that addresses possible objections and demonstrates the trust maker’s intent in a manner consistent with California procedures.
The first step is gathering all documentation that supports the claim that assets were intended for the trust. This includes the trust instrument, deeds, escrow and closing documents, bank and escrow payment records, communications, and any notes or drafts showing intent. We also collect statements from individuals who can attest to the trust maker’s actions or words regarding the transfer. After assembling the record, we assess strengths and potential challenges and advise on the best path forward based on the evidence and the interests of beneficiaries.
We help clients identify and obtain copies of critical documents such as the trust agreement, deed drafts or signed deeds, escrow instructions, closing statements, bank records showing trust funds used, and any correspondence with title companies or financial institutions. Gathering these records early allows us to identify which assets are likely to be recognized as trust property and which items may need further investigation. Well-organized documentation strengthens the narrative presented to the court and can streamline the petition drafting process.
We interview individuals who can provide first-hand accounts of the trust maker’s intent and actions, such as family members, attorneys, financial advisors, or escrow officers. We then prepare sworn declarations that set out timeline events, the trust maker’s statements, and any steps taken to fund the trust. These declarations support the petition by providing credible, organized testimony that explains why the court should treat the assets as trust property and how the decedent intended those assets to be distributed.
Once the evidence has been collected and declarations are drafted, we prepare the petition and supporting exhibits for filing in the appropriate California court. The petition sets forth the factual background, identifies the assets at issue, and requests the specific relief needed to treat the assets as trust property. We ensure all interested parties are properly named and served under applicable rules and manage communications with the court to schedule hearings. Careful drafting is important to present a clear legal and factual basis for the requested relief.
Drafting involves preparing a detailed petition that organizes evidence into a clear narrative and attaches supporting exhibits such as deeds, trust excerpts, payment records, and signed declarations. We frame the legal argument under applicable California law and anticipate common objections by addressing potential factual disputes within the declarations. Clear organization of exhibits and precise requests for relief help the court understand the desired outcome and reduce the likelihood of delays caused by incomplete or unclear filings.
After filing, the petition must be properly served on all required parties, which may include beneficiaries, heirs, creditors, and other interested individuals or entities. We coordinate service and prepare any necessary notices to ensure compliance with procedural requirements. Proper service provides parties an opportunity to raise objections or participate in hearings and helps the court confirm it has jurisdiction and enough information to consider the requested relief. Timely and correct handling of service matters is essential to moving the case forward.
Following filing and service, the court will consider the petition at a hearing where parties may present arguments or evidence. We represent trustees and proponents of the petition at hearings, summarizing the evidence and addressing questions from the judge or opposing parties. If the court is persuaded by the record, it may issue an order directing that specified assets be treated as trust property or providing other relief to effectuate the trust maker’s intent. The court’s order then guides title companies and institutions in transferring or releasing assets under trust administration.
At the hearing, we present declarations, documentary exhibits, and legal argument to show why the court should treat the assets as trust property. If objections are raised, we address them with factual clarification and legal responses grounded in the assembled record. Clear, focused presentation helps the court weigh credibility and the totality of evidence. Our goal is to obtain an order that reflects the trust maker’s intentions and provides a workable directive for trustees and third parties handling the property.
If the court issues the requested relief, we assist with implementing the order by coordinating with title companies, banks, and other institutions to effect transfers or confirm trust ownership. We provide copies of the court order and guidance on next steps for trustees to continue administration in accordance with the trust. When the order is clear and properly implemented, affected assets can be managed and distributed under the trust, reducing the need for separate probate proceedings for those items and allowing beneficiaries to receive their intended shares without unnecessary delay.
A Heggstad petition is a California court filing that asks a judge to treat certain property as though it had been properly transferred into a trust when the trust maker clearly intended that result but the formal transfer did not occur. It is commonly used when deeds were signed but not recorded, or when assets were purchased with trust funds but never retitled. The petition compiles documentary and testimonial evidence to demonstrate the trust maker’s intent and requests a judicial order that aligns title with the trust, enabling trustees to administer those assets under the trust terms. The petition process is fact-specific: the strength of the petition depends largely on the quality and consistency of the evidence showing intent. Courts look to the trust instrument, transfer-related documents, payment records, and witness declarations when evaluating the claim. If the court finds sufficient evidence, it can issue an order treating the asset as trust property, avoiding probate for that item and facilitating distribution under the trust.
The timeline for a Heggstad petition varies depending on the complexity of the facts, court schedules, and whether interested parties contest the petition. In uncontested cases with strong documentation, the process can move more quickly, often taking a few months from initial document gathering to a hearing. When disputes or contested issues arise, the timeline can extend considerably as discovery, additional declarations, and hearings may be required. Local court calendars and the need to serve and notify interested parties also affect timing. Early, thorough preparation of supporting documents and clear communication with all involved parties can help streamline the process and reduce delays. We advise clients on realistic timelines based on the particulars of their case and local practice.
Persuasive evidence in a Heggstad petition includes the trust instrument, signed but unrecorded deeds, escrow and closing statements, bank records showing trust funds were used for purchases, and contemporaneous communications indicating intent to fund the trust. Declarations from individuals who observed the trust maker’s actions or heard explicit statements of intent are also powerful. The court evaluates the totality of the record to determine whether the evidence supports treating the asset as trust property. Organizing evidence in a clear, chronological fashion and addressing potential inconsistencies proactively strengthens a petition. Presenting coherent documentation that ties the asset to the trust maker’s plan and demonstrates consistent behavior or steps toward funding increases the likelihood the court will grant the requested relief.
A Heggstad petition can remove specific assets from probate by establishing they should be treated as trust property, but it does not automatically avoid probate for every asset in an estate. The petition addresses particular items that were intended for the trust yet not formally transferred. If most assets are already properly titled or designated, the petition may significantly reduce the scope of probate, but if multiple assets remain outside the trust and lack supporting evidence, probate may still be necessary for those items. Each situation is unique, and the petition’s effect depends on the assets involved and the court’s findings. A careful review of all estate assets helps determine whether a Heggstad petition alone suffices or whether additional estate administration steps will be required.
Yes, beneficiaries, heirs, or other interested parties may object to a Heggstad petition if they believe the evidence is insufficient or if they dispute the trust maker’s intent. Objections can lead to additional litigation steps such as depositions, further declarations, or contested hearings. Preparing a strong evidentiary record and providing timely notice to interested parties are important to address potential challenges and reduce the likelihood of protracted disputes. When objections arise, courts evaluate competing evidence and consider credibility, documentary support, and legal arguments from all sides. Effective preparation seeks to anticipate common objections and present convincing factual documentation so the court can resolve disputes based on the fuller record.
Risks associated with pursuing a Heggstad petition include the time and expense of litigation if the matter becomes contested, and the possibility that the court may not find the evidence persuasive, which could result in the asset remaining subject to probate. There is also the potential for increased family tension as interested parties review and challenge documentation. However, when adequate evidence is present, the petition can provide a faster and more private resolution for affected assets than opening a full probate. Weighing the likely benefits against possible costs and delays is part of deciding whether to proceed. A careful assessment of documentary strength, the likelihood of objections, and the relative value of the assets at issue helps determine whether the petition is a prudent course of action.
If the court grants a Heggstad petition, it will issue an order describing the relief and directing that the specified assets be treated as trust property. With that order, title companies, financial institutions, and other third parties typically accept the court’s direction and process transfers or updates necessary to recognize the trust as owner. Trustees can then administer and distribute those assets under the trust’s terms, reducing the need for probate for those particular items. Implementation following the order may involve submitting certified copies to financial institutions or recording documents pursuant to the court’s direction. We assist clients in carrying out these administrative steps to ensure the court’s order is fully effective and assets are properly transferred or released to the trustee.
A Heggstad petition typically addresses assets that are best recognized by the court as trust property when transfer formalities were incomplete. Retirement accounts and life insurance policies are governed by contract and beneficiary designation rules, so those accounts are often resolved through plan administrators rather than a Heggstad petition. If a beneficiary designation was intended to align with a trust but was not completed, alternative steps may be needed to address those assets, depending on plan terms and whether the trust was a permitted beneficiary. For accounts governed by separate statutes or plan rules, coordinating with plan administrators and considering other legal remedies in addition to or instead of a Heggstad petition is often appropriate. We evaluate the nature of each asset to determine the most effective path to achieve the trust maker’s intended outcome.
Costs for a Heggstad petition can vary depending on the complexity of the facts, the number of assets involved, the need for depositions or contested hearings, and local court fee schedules. In straightforward, uncontested matters with clear documentation, the expenses are generally limited to filing fees, service costs, and reasonable time for drafting and filing the petition. When disputes arise or additional discovery is needed, costs can increase accordingly. An initial assessment to gather documents and evaluate the strength of the record helps estimate likely costs and recommend an efficient strategy. We discuss anticipated steps and provide transparent guidance about potential fees so clients can make informed decisions about proceeding with a petition.
A Heggstad petition is a remedy under California law and applies to property and proceedings within California courts. For assets located in other states, local law governs title transfers and trust recognition, so alternative legal approaches may be necessary. Coordinating with counsel licensed in the state where the asset is located helps determine whether similar remedies exist or whether a different filing is required to align title with the trust maker’s intent under that state’s law. When assets cross state lines, a coordinated strategy that addresses jurisdictional issues and differences in property transfer procedures is important. We can work with local counsel in other states as needed to pursue appropriate relief and to help ensure the decedent’s intentions are respected across jurisdictions.
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