A Heggstad petition resolves the common problem of transferring property into an existing trust when a deed was not formally changed at the time the trust was created. If you live in Yorba Linda or elsewhere in Orange County, this legal tool can prevent probate and keep family affairs private. The Law Offices of Robert P. Bergman assist residents with petitions that ask a judge to recognize trust ownership for property that should have been moved into a trust. This introduction explains why the petition matters and what steps typically follow filing in California probate court.
Many clients reach out because a deed was unintentionally left in an individual’s name after a trust was funded, or property was omitted during estate planning transitions. A Heggstad petition provides a clear judicial remedy by asking the court to declare that the property was intended to be trust property all along. The process supports estate planning goals such as avoiding probate, maintaining privacy, and ensuring assets are handled according to the trustmaker’s wishes. We discuss how the petition works and how it interacts with other estate planning documents like pour-over wills and trust certifications.
A Heggstad petition can restore the intended flow of assets into a trust and avoid the delays, costs, and publicity of probate administration. Families often discover after the trustmaker’s death that a property deed never got recorded in the name of the trust, leaving heirs vulnerable to probate oversight and potential disputes. Filing a petition asks the court to recognize trust ownership based on the trustmaker’s intent and supporting evidence, such as trust documents, draft deeds, and communications. The result can preserve the estate plan’s benefits, streamline administration, and reduce stress during an already difficult time for loved ones.
The Law Offices of Robert P. Bergman provide personalized estate planning and trust administration services to individuals and families across California, including Yorba Linda and Orange County. Our approach emphasizes careful review of trust documents, deeds, and related records to determine the best path forward when assets are not properly titled. We work closely with clients to gather evidence, prepare clear filings for probate court, and advocate for outcomes that align with the decedent’s documented intentions. Our goal is to make the Heggstad petition process as efficient and understandable as possible for families managing estate transitions.
A Heggstad petition is a legal request submitted to the probate court to declare that certain property should be treated as trust property despite not being formally transferred into the trust by recorded deed. The petition relies on evidence showing the trustmaker’s intent for the property to be part of the trust, such as trust documents, draft deeds, correspondence, and testimony. Courts evaluate the totality of evidence and may issue an order that recognizes trust ownership, enabling trustees to manage or distribute the property under the trust’s terms. This process can prevent probate and clarify title for future transactions.
The procedural steps typically include document collection, drafting the petition, filing with the appropriate Orange County probate court, serving interested parties, and attending any required hearings. Evidence is crucial, and the process often benefits from careful organization of the trust instrument, draft or unsigned deeds, closing statements, and witness statements about the trustmaker’s intent. While the petition aims to confirm that the asset belonged to the trust, courts may require specific proof before issuing an order. Understanding these practical steps helps clients prepare for a smooth court process and informed decision-making.
A Heggstad petition asks the probate court to recognize that property not reflected in public records was nevertheless intended to belong to a revocable living trust. The petition clarifies title, allowing a trustee to exercise the trust’s powers over the property, such as managing, selling, or distributing it to beneficiaries in accordance with the trust instrument. The request is typically supported by documentary evidence and sometimes witness testimony that demonstrates the trustmaker’s intent to transfer the asset. When successful, the petition aligns the property’s legal status with the estate plan’s goals without the need for full probate administration.
Courts examine several factors when evaluating a Heggstad petition, including the trust document itself, any drafts or intended deeds, the timing of the trust’s creation, and communications or actions that indicate the trustmaker intended the property to be held by the trust. Additional evidence can include transaction records, escrow instructions, and witness statements. The petition must present a persuasive narrative supported by documents showing that title retention in the trustmaker’s individual name was an oversight rather than a deliberate act. Presenting these elements clearly improves the likelihood of a favorable court ruling.
Understanding common terminology helps demystify the Heggstad petition process. Definitions cover terms like trust funding, trustee, beneficiary, deed, pour-over will, and probate court. Knowing these basics makes it easier to gather relevant documents and articulate the trustmaker’s intentions. This section provides concise explanations of the most frequently encountered concepts so clients can better follow the petition process and participate in decision-making. Clear definitions reduce confusion and empower families to proceed thoughtfully when addressing untitled trust assets.
Trust funding refers to the process of transferring ownership of assets from an individual into a trust so that the trust holds legal title. This can include real estate transferred by deed, bank accounts retitled, and beneficiary designations updated to reflect trust ownership. Proper funding is often necessary for a trust to function as intended by avoiding probate and enabling the trustee to manage assets according to the trust instrument. When funding is incomplete, legal steps such as a Heggstad petition may be used to reconcile intent and formal title.
A pour-over will works in conjunction with a trust to direct assets that were not transferred into the trust during the trustmaker’s lifetime to be transferred into the trust upon death. It acts as a safety net to ensure assets pass under the trust terms, but assets covered solely by a pour-over will may still be subject to probate. A Heggstad petition may be used when documents show the decedent intended those assets for the trust but formal title transfer was not completed, helping align the distribution with the overall estate plan.
A trustee is the individual or entity charged with managing trust assets according to the trust document’s terms and in the beneficiaries’ best interests. Duties include preserving assets, paying debts, filing necessary tax returns, and distributing assets as directed by the trust. When title to an asset was not formally moved into the trust, the trustee may seek a Heggstad petition to confirm the trust’s authority over that property so that the trustee can carry out those responsibilities without interference from probate processes or disputes among heirs.
Probate court refers to the judicial forum that oversees administration of estates, validates wills, and resolves disputes over asset distribution. A Heggstad petition is filed in probate court to request a judicial declaration that certain assets were intended to be trust property. The probate court reviews the submitted evidence, hears any objections, and decides whether to issue an order recognizing trust ownership. Using this path can avoid a broader probate administration, helping families preserve the privacy and efficiency intended by the decedent’s trust.
When an asset remains titled in an individual’s name despite a trust, there are several possible remedies. Options include filing a Heggstad petition to have the court declare the property belongs to the trust, initiating a full probate administration, or pursuing alternative quiet title or corrective deed actions. Each route has pros and cons related to time, cost, public record exposure, and the complexity of evidence needed. A Heggstad petition often offers a balanced path that targets the specific untitled asset while avoiding the broader probate process for the entire estate.
A limited approach such as a Heggstad petition is often appropriate when only a few assets were omitted from trust funding and the surrounding facts clearly demonstrate the trustmaker’s intent. In these situations, the petition can address the specific title issue without opening full estate administration. When documentary evidence like draft deeds, escrow records, or clear statements of intent exists, courts may be able to promptly confirm trust ownership. This focused remedy helps preserve privacy for unrelated assets and can reduce legal costs compared with a comprehensive probate process.
When there is strong documentary support—such as a trust agreement that lists the property, drafts of a deed, or communications showing intent to include the property in the trust—a Heggstad petition can be an efficient method to correct the title. Courts look for convincing proof that the omission was inadvertent rather than intentional. Providing organized, corroborating documents and witness statements can allow the court to grant relief without lengthy litigation. This resolution keeps the handling of the asset aligned with the trustmaker’s plan while minimizing procedural complexity.
A comprehensive legal approach may be necessary when multiple assets are untitled, estate documents are inconsistent, or there are disputes among potential beneficiaries. In such circumstances, a broader review of asset titling, beneficiary designations, and potential litigation risks helps determine whether a Heggstad petition alone will suffice or whether additional filings, corrections, or a more involved probate administration are required. Taking a wider view protects the estate’s overall integrity and helps ensure that final distributions honor the trustmaker’s intentions across all assets.
When the decedent’s intent is unclear or documents conflict—for example, if deeds, wills, or beneficiary designations present inconsistent dispositions—a simple petition may not resolve all issues. In these cases, counsel may need to prepare for contested hearings, negotiate settlements among interested parties, or pursue additional court orders to clarify rights and duties. A comprehensive approach includes careful investigation, thorough documentation, and strategic filings that reduce the risk of later challenges and ensure the estate plan’s objectives are fully implemented.
A comprehensive approach identifies all potential title problems and designs a coordinated plan to resolve them, which can reduce the likelihood of future disputes and additional court proceedings. By reviewing deeds, trust provisions, beneficiary designations, and transaction histories, a broader strategy addresses both obvious omissions and subtle inconsistencies that could later complicate administration. This method helps protect beneficiaries’ interests, clarifies trustee authority across all assets, and promotes an orderly transfer of property under the trust’s terms while preserving privacy and minimizing unnecessary probate exposure.
Comprehensive planning also allows for proactive corrections such as recording corrective deeds, updating beneficiary designations, and, where appropriate, filing petitions or other court actions that fully align asset titles with the trust. Taking a holistic view can reveal tax, creditor, or creditor-claim concerns that a narrow fix might miss. Addressing these issues together can save time and expense in the long run by preventing incremental filings and disputes, and it provides beneficiaries with greater certainty about the distribution and management of the estate.
Resolving multiple title and document issues together reduces the need for additional filings and court appearances, helping trustees manage the estate more efficiently. A coordinated resolution minimizes the chances that overlooked items will lead to later challenges or litigation, since a comprehensive review seeks out potential problems early. Trustees and beneficiaries benefit from clearer authority and a unified plan for asset distribution, which in turn reduces administrative delays, conserves estate resources, and promotes a more amicable transition during what is often a difficult time for family members.
A comprehensive approach helps keep matters that would otherwise be public via probate private by ensuring assets are properly titled in the trust whenever feasible. Courts can issue orders that align title with trust intent without exposing unrelated estate details in broader probate proceedings. Preserving privacy honors the trustmaker’s wishes and reduces emotional strain on family members. Additionally, a well-planned approach protects the trustmaker’s distribution choices by addressing potential inconsistencies before they become the subject of dispute or public record.
Collecting the right documents early makes a significant difference in the Heggstad petition process. Look for the trust document, any draft or signed but unrecorded deeds, escrow or closing statements, bank communications referencing the trust, and notes or correspondence that reflect the trustmaker’s intent. Statements from individuals who were present during discussions about funding the trust can also support the petition. Organizing these materials chronologically and providing clear copies reduces delays and helps the court evaluate the factual record when considering your request.
Anticipate possible objections or inquiries from interested parties and prepare clear explanations supported by documents. Maintaining open lines of communication with beneficiaries and potential heirs can reduce disputes and lead to cooperative resolutions. Keep detailed records of all actions taken to gather evidence and communicate decisions about the estate. If additional legal steps are required, early planning reduces the risk of rushed filings and helps everyone involved understand the timeline for court review and resolution.
A Heggstad petition can be the most appropriate course when an asset that should belong to a trust remains titled in an individual’s name, risking probate and unwanted publicity. Filing the petition clarifies title and enables trust administration under the trust’s terms, helping beneficiaries receive assets as intended without a full probate cycle. It provides a judicial declaration that aligns the estate’s handling with documented intent, reducing uncertainty and streamlining distribution. For families in Yorba Linda and across Orange County, this remedy offers a practical way to honor the trustmaker’s plan.
Another reason to consider a petition is to prevent delays in selling or refinancing property that remains untitled. Lenders and buyers often require clear title, and unresolved ownership can stall transactions. A court order recognizing trust ownership resolves title defects and allows trustees to proceed with real estate transactions or other management tasks. The petition also reduces the risk of future litigation by openly addressing the discrepancy between intended trust ownership and recorded title, providing a stable foundation for trustee actions and beneficiary distributions.
Common circumstances include property that was purchased or retained by the trustmaker but never retitled into the trust, errors during closing where the deed was left in an individual’s name, and transfers intended to be made by a pour-over will that were never completed. Other situations involve successor trustees lacking clear authority to act because title remains outside the trust. In these scenarios, a Heggstad petition offers a judicial path to confirm trust ownership based on the estate planning documents and the trustmaker’s documented intentions.
Sometimes a deed was drafted but never recorded, or paperwork shows intent to transfer property into a trust but fails to complete the recording process. These unrecorded instruments can create a gap between the trust document and public records. A Heggstad petition uses the available documentary trail to demonstrate the trustmaker’s intention to fund the trust, asking the court to recognize the intended ownership despite the absence of a recorded deed. This remedy reconciles the trust plan with title records for practical administration.
Following the creation of a trust, property titles should be updated to reflect trust ownership. When this step is overlooked, assets intended for the trust remain in the individual’s name. This can be particularly problematic when the trustmaker passes away, as it may trigger probate procedures for items meant to be handled through the trust. Filing a Heggstad petition asks the court to correct the oversight by declaring that the property was always intended to be part of the trust, enabling trustees to manage and distribute the asset accordingly.
Conflicting or ambiguous estate documents, such as inconsistent deeds, beneficiary designations, or multiple revisions of trust paperwork, can leave uncertainty about asset ownership. In these cases, a Heggstad petition is one tool to present the most reliable evidence to the court so that it can resolve discrepancies and declare the correct titling of property. Addressing these conflicts early helps prevent prolonged disputes, clarifies trustee authority, and supports distributions that align with the trustmaker’s most recent valid intentions.
The Law Offices of Robert P. Bergman serve clients in Yorba Linda and throughout Orange County with trust-related issues including Heggstad petitions, trust funding, and corrective deeds. We assist by reviewing file documents, advising on the strength of evidence, preparing court filings, and guiding clients through hearings. Our aim is to reduce stress and uncertainty for families navigating estate transitions. Residents can reach our office for an initial discussion to evaluate whether a targeted petition or a more comprehensive plan best meets the needs of the estate and its beneficiaries.
Families choose the Law Offices of Robert P. Bergman because we focus on clear communication, careful document preparation, and pragmatic solutions for resolving trust funding problems. We help clients assemble the necessary evidence, identify the most effective legal pathway, and prepare filings that clearly present the trustmaker’s intent. Our approach seeks to minimize court time and streamline outcomes so trustees can carry out their responsibilities promptly. For issues involving property title discrepancies, our goal is to restore order and protect the estate’s plan.
Our practice emphasizes client-centered service that guides you through each procedural step and keeps beneficiaries informed about the process and expected timelines. We handle filings in Orange County probate courts and coordinate with title companies, escrow officers, and other professionals as needed to resolve outstanding title issues. By managing logistics and legal strategy, we allow families to focus on preserving relationships and carrying out the trustmaker’s wishes. Clear documentation and steady communication are central to how we approach each matter.
We also assist with related documents that often arise alongside Heggstad petitions, including pour-over wills, certifications of trust, and corrective deeds. Addressing these elements in tandem helps prevent future title problems and ensures a smoother transition for property management and distribution. Our work aims to provide clients with a durable resolution that aligns public records with the trustmaker’s intent so trustees can exercise their duties with confidence and beneficiaries receive what was intended under the trust documents.
Our process begins with a focused review of trust instruments, deeds, and transaction records to determine whether a Heggstad petition is appropriate. We then gather supporting documents, prepare a clear petition that explains the trustmaker’s intent, and handle filing and service requirements in the probate court. If the matter proceeds to a hearing, we present the evidence and advocate for an order that recognizes trust ownership. After an order is obtained, we assist with recording necessary documents and taking steps to align title records with the trust’s terms for ongoing administration.
The initial phase focuses on collecting and reviewing all relevant documentation, including the trust agreement, deeds, correspondence, escrow records, and any drafts or unsigned instruments. We assess the strength of available evidence and determine whether a Heggstad petition is the most effective remedy or if alternative filings are preferable. This careful assessment helps estimate timelines and potential challenges, and it ensures that filings to the probate court are grounded in an organized factual record that supports the trustmaker’s intended ownership of the asset in question.
Collecting documents early reduces delays and strengthens the petition. We request trust documents, deed history, escrow and closing records, and any communications that reflect funding intent. Witness statements from individuals with first-hand knowledge can supplement documentary evidence. Organizing these materials into a cohesive file makes it easier to present the facts to the court, clarifies the timeline of events, and helps identify any additional steps needed, such as obtaining certified copies of records or preparing notarized affidavits to support the petition’s claims.
Part of the preliminary work includes anticipating potential objections from heirs or other interested parties and addressing those concerns proactively. We evaluate competing documents, identify inconsistencies, and plan how to respond to likely challenges. Preparing clear explanations and gathering corroborating evidence reduces the risk of contested hearings. Where appropriate, we explore whether informal resolution with interested parties is possible before filing, which can save time and expense while preserving relationships among family members during the estate settlement process.
Once documentation and strategy are in place, we draft a petition that outlines the facts and legal basis for recognizing trust ownership, attaching supporting exhibits and declarations. We ensure the petition complies with local probate court rules for Orange County and complete required forms for filing. After submission, the court assigns a hearing date and the petition must be served on interested parties. Clear, well-prepared filings that present a compelling factual narrative increase the likelihood of a timely court order recognizing the trust’s claim to the property.
Filing includes preparing the petition, exhibits, and any required notices, then submitting the materials to the appropriate probate department of the Orange County court. We handle filing logistics and ensure service requirements are met for heirs and other interested parties. The court assigns a case number and schedules a hearing, during which parties may appear or submit written positions. Maintaining compliance with procedural rules and deadlines is essential to avoid delays and ensure the court can promptly consider the petition.
Proper service of the petition and notice to all interested parties is a required step in the process, giving heirs and potential claimants an opportunity to review the filing and respond. We prepare and serve the necessary documents according to California probate rules and handle any follow-up proof of service filings. Timely, accurate service protects the court’s jurisdiction over the matter and helps prevent future challenges based on procedural defects, making the path to a court order smoother and more reliable for trustees and beneficiaries.
At the scheduled hearing, the court reviews submitted evidence, hears any objections, and decides whether to issue an order recognizing the property as trust-owned. We present documentary evidence and, where helpful, witness declarations that corroborate the trustmaker’s intent. If the court grants the petition, the resulting order clarifies title and allows the trustee to manage or transfer the asset under the trust’s terms. After obtaining the order, we assist with any necessary recording or follow-up steps to ensure public records reflect the trust’s ownership.
Presenting evidence in a clear, organized manner is central to a successful hearing. We prepare exhibits, declarations, and summaries that explain the sequence of events and the trustmaker’s intent. Witness statements and documentary trails such as drafts of deeds or escrow records can be persuasive when the court considers whether the omission of recorded title was inadvertent. Focused presentation reduces the court’s need for supplemental records and supports a timely ruling that aligns the property’s legal status with the trust instrument.
After the court issues an order recognizing trust ownership, it may be necessary to record a certified copy of that order or file a corrective deed to align public records with the court’s decision. We guide trustees through these recording steps and update any related documentation so title companies and future buyers see consistent ownership records. Completing these final tasks ensures the trust can be administered as intended and reduces the likelihood of future title disputes or complications for estate management and beneficiary distributions.
Key evidence for a Heggstad petition includes the trust document itself, any drafts or unrecorded deeds that reference the trust, escrow or closing statements, and communications or instructions indicating the trustmaker’s intent to include the property in the trust. Declarations from individuals who were present when the trust funding was discussed can also help establish intent. Providing a clear, organized set of documents that trace the trustmaker’s actions and intentions is important to presenting a persuasive factual narrative to the court. When documentary evidence is strong and coherent, the court is more likely to grant relief recognizing trust ownership. Even when some items are missing, corroborating materials and credible witness statements can make a difference. It is helpful to prepare a concise chronology and explanation that links the trust documents to the property transaction, which allows the court to see that the omission of a recorded deed was an oversight rather than a deliberate decision to keep title outside the trust.
The timeline for resolving a Heggstad petition varies based on the complexity of the facts, the volume of evidence, and the court’s schedule. Simple matters with clear documentation and no objections can be resolved more quickly, while contested cases or those requiring additional discovery may take longer. Filing, serving interested parties, and obtaining a hearing date all affect timing, and the probate court’s calendar in Orange County influences how soon a matter can be heard. Clients should plan for multiple weeks to several months in typical situations, and potentially longer if objections arise or supplementary information is required. Early organization and prompt service help streamline the process. We work to provide realistic timeline estimates based on the specific circumstances and any anticipated challenges to avoid surprises during proceedings.
A Heggstad petition, if granted, results in a court order recognizing the property as trust-owned, which effectively aligns that asset with the trust and removes it from the assets that would otherwise pass through probate. The petition addresses the specific property or properties at issue and prevents those items from requiring full probate administration simply because public records show title in an individual’s name. This targeted remedy helps preserve the privacy and efficiencies intended by the trust for those assets. However, it is important to understand the petition resolves title issues for the particular property identified and does not automatically affect unrelated assets that remain outside the trust or other matters requiring probate. Each asset is evaluated on its own record, and additional steps may be needed for a complete estate administration if there are other probate-triggering items or disputes requiring broader court involvement.
Yes, beneficiaries or other interested parties can contest a Heggstad petition if they believe the evidence does not support the claim that the property was intended to be trust property. Objections may be based on alleged inconsistencies, competing documents, or arguments that the omission was intentional. The court provides an opportunity for parties to be heard and to present their own evidence in response to the petition. To reduce the likelihood of successful contests, it helps to assemble clear documentation and, where feasible, seek informal agreement among heirs before filing. When objections do occur, the court evaluates the credibility and weight of the evidence presented by each side and makes a determination based on the trustmaker’s documented intent and applicable legal standards.
If a Heggstad petition is not appropriate due to insufficient evidence or other factors, alternatives include initiating a full probate administration for the estate, preparing corrective deeds where feasible, or pursuing a quiet title action in certain circumstances. A pour-over will may also move assets into the trust through probate, though that path typically involves public administration and potential delays. The best option depends on the estate’s overall composition and the strength of available proof for trust ownership. A comprehensive review of the estate’s documents helps determine the most cost-effective and practical remedy. Sometimes a combination of steps is needed, such as filing a petition for some assets while addressing others through corrective deeds or beneficiary updates. We evaluate each case to recommend the strategy that best preserves the trustmaker’s intent and minimizes estate administration burdens.
A recorded court order recognizing trust ownership generally clarifies title for title companies and mortgage lenders, allowing the trustee to proceed with sales, refinances, or other transactions that depend on clear title. Lenders and title insurers typically review the court’s order and the recorded documents to confirm the trustee’s authority to act. Properly recording the order and any corrective documents aligns the public record with the legal determination made by the court. Before relying on the order for a specific transaction, trustees should coordinate with lenders and title companies to confirm any additional requirements they may have. In some cases, lenders or buyers may request certified copies of the order or additional documentation to complete their internal clearance processes, and we assist with meeting those practical needs.
California probate rules require notice to interested parties when a petition affecting estate assets is filed. Identifying and notifying heirs, beneficiaries, and other interested persons is part of the process to ensure they have an opportunity to respond. Proper service helps the court acquire jurisdiction over all parties and protects the resulting order from later procedural challenges based on lack of notice. We assist clients in identifying the necessary parties and arranging appropriate service according to the local probate rules. In many cases, advance communication with potential interested parties can reduce surprise and the likelihood of contested proceedings, though formal legal notice is still typically required to complete the filing process and proceed to hearing.
When evidence is limited or ambiguous, the court weighs the available documentation and testimony to determine whether the trustmaker’s intent can be reasonably established. Limited evidence does not always preclude relief, but the petition must present a coherent case supported by whatever records and witness accounts exist. The court’s decision turns on the credibility and persuasiveness of the submitted materials and the legal standards applied to trust funding disputes. If evidence is weak, alternative remedies or additional fact-finding steps may be necessary. That might include obtaining affidavits from witnesses, searching for archival records, or negotiating an agreed resolution with interested parties. We help clients evaluate the strength of available proof and recommend next steps that balance probability of success with the time and cost involved in further fact development.
A pour-over will works alongside a trust to move assets into the trust upon the trustmaker’s death, but assets transferred via a pour-over will still pass through probate before entering the trust. When documents indicate the decedent intended property to be trust-owned, a Heggstad petition can provide a way to correct title without relying solely on the probate process. The petition addresses the underlying issue of recorded title and can prevent the need for probate related to that specific asset. Understanding how a pour-over will interacts with a Heggstad petition helps families choose the most efficient path to align public records with the estate plan. Where practical, combining corrective actions for title with updates to other estate planning documents reduces later complications and helps complete the trustmaker’s intended distribution plan.
Costs associated with filing a Heggstad petition vary depending on the complexity of the matter, the amount of evidence to be gathered and reviewed, and whether contested proceedings arise. Typical expenses include court filing fees, costs of obtaining certified records, and professional fees for drafting and filing the petition and supporting documents. When cases are straightforward and uncontested, fees are often limited to preparation and filing costs, whereas contested matters may require additional time for hearings and potential discovery. Providing a clear scope of work early helps estimate costs and identify potential additional expenditures. We discuss anticipated fees during the initial consultation, offer practical guidance on document collection to reduce unnecessary expense, and aim to manage the process efficiently so clients can anticipate likely costs and outcomes before proceeding.
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