A Heggstad petition can be essential when assets intended for a trust were not properly transferred before a person passed away. At the Law Offices of Robert P. Bergman, our Sunnyvale practice addresses situations where decedent assets remain in the probate estate but belong in a trust according to estate planning documents like pour-over wills or certification of trust. This page explains how a Heggstad petition works under California law, when a petition is appropriate, and how our firm assists families and fiduciaries in seeking court confirmation that property should be transferred to the trust for the benefit of the beneficiaries.
Many families discover after a loved one’s death that an intended trust does not control certain assets because the title was never retitled or beneficiary designations were not updated. That can create delays, added costs, and uncertainty about who should receive the property. A Heggstad petition asks the court to determine that trust property should pass to the trust as if it had been properly transferred during the decedent’s lifetime. This section outlines the procedural steps, common outcomes, and practical considerations for trustees, beneficiaries, and family members confronting unresolved trust funding issues in Santa Clara County.
Filing a Heggstad petition can resolve disputes and provide legal clarity about ownership of specific assets, avoiding prolonged probate or contested distribution. It allows a court to recognize that certain property should be considered part of a trust despite administrative defects, supporting the settlor’s intent and enabling the trustee to administer the estate according to the trust’s terms. For beneficiaries, obtaining that judicial recognition reduces uncertainty and allows distribution to proceed. For trustees, it reduces personal exposure by creating a court record that supports the transfer, and for families it can reduce conflict and additional expense that arise from unresolved title or beneficiary designation issues.
The Law Offices of Robert P. Bergman in San Jose and Sunnyvale focus on trusts, wills, and related petitions, including Heggstad matters. The firm assists trustees, personal representatives, and beneficiaries with court filings, petition drafting, and negotiations that clarify trust funding issues. We work with clients to gather documentation such as the trust instrument, pour-over wills, asset titles, and account statements to present a coherent record to the court. The firm also coordinates with fiduciaries and family members to pursue efficient resolutions while protecting the rights of those entitled to trust property under California law.
A Heggstad petition seeks a judicial determination that certain assets should be treated as trust property despite being titled differently at the time of death. It commonly arises when a pour-over will indicates the settlor intended assets to pass to a trust, but the actual retitling did not occur. The petition identifies the assets, provides evidence of the settlor’s intent and the trust document, and asks the court to confirm that transfer as if it had occurred before death. This process follows established California procedures and often requires clear documentation and legal argument to support the requested relief.
The legal standard for a successful Heggstad petition centers on demonstrating the settlor’s intent and a sufficient nexus between the asset and the trust arrangement. Courts will review trust provisions, wills such as pour-over wills, account statements, and related records to determine whether the property should be treated as trust property. In some cases, third-party creditors or other interested persons may object, which requires careful preparation and negotiation. Timely filing and comprehensive evidence improve the likelihood of a favorable ruling and a smoother transition of assets into trust administration or distribution.
Under California law, a Heggstad petition is a judicial proceeding requesting a declaration that an asset belongs to a decedent’s trust even though it was not properly transferred or retitled during the decedent’s life. The petition is based on showing the settlor intended ownership to reside with the trust, often supported by pour-over wills, trust instruments, beneficiary designations, or contemporaneous statements. The court may order that the asset be treated as trust property or direct its transfer to the trustee. This remedy helps implement estate plans and prevents assets from being distributed contrary to the decedent’s written intent.
A Heggstad petition requires thorough documentation and a clear presentation to the court. Essential elements include the trust instrument, any pour-over will or related testamentary document, asset titles or account records, and evidence demonstrating the settlor’s intent to have the asset pass to the trust. The process generally involves filing a petition in probate court, providing notice to interested parties, responding to any objections, and obtaining a court order transferring or declaring the asset part of the trust. Working carefully through each step helps minimize delays and litigation risks while protecting fiduciary decision-making.
Understanding common terms helps trustees and families follow the process. This glossary provides plain-language definitions of legal concepts relevant to Heggstad petitions, such as trust instruments, pour-over wills, funding, and probate procedures. Familiarity with these terms supports better communication with counsel and court administrators, and aids in collecting the necessary documentation. By clarifying the vocabulary used in filings and hearings, clients can make informed decisions and avoid misunderstandings that might delay the transfer of assets to the trust and the final distribution to beneficiaries under California law.
A trust instrument is the written document that establishes the trust, names the trustee, identifies beneficiaries, and details how trust assets are to be managed and distributed. It is the core document used to show the settlor’s intent when seeking court recognition that an asset belongs to the trust. When preparing a Heggstad petition, presenting a clear and properly executed trust instrument helps the court assess whether the asset should be deemed trust property, particularly when combined with supporting evidence like pour-over wills or account statements indicating the settlor’s plan for those assets.
A pour-over will is a testamentary document that directs assets not previously transferred into a trust to be transferred into the trust at the time of probate. It reflects the settlor’s intent that any property outside the trust should ultimately be administered under the trust terms. In Heggstad petition matters, a pour-over will can be persuasive evidence that the decedent intended particular assets to belong to the trust, supporting a court’s decision to treat those assets as if they had been retitled during life and thereby facilitating trust administration consistent with the settlor’s wishes.
Funding the trust refers to the act of transferring ownership or titling of assets into the name of the trust so the trustee can manage and distribute them under trust terms. Common funding steps include retitling bank accounts, changing beneficiary designations, and transferring real property deeds. When funding does not occur before a settlor’s death, a Heggstad petition may be needed to align the distribution of those assets with the trust. Proper funding while the settlor is alive generally avoids court proceedings and ensures smoother administration after death.
Trustee duties include managing trust assets prudently, providing notices to beneficiaries when required, and seeking court guidance when title or distribution questions arise. Notices inform beneficiaries and interested parties of court petitions and hearings, giving them an opportunity to object or participate. In Heggstad matters, proper notice is required to protect the rights of heirs, creditors, and beneficiaries and to ensure the court’s order is binding and effective. Careful adherence to notice requirements helps secure a definitive legal resolution and reduces the risk of later disputes.
When assets are not titled in a trust, interested parties may consider a Heggstad petition, formal probate, or informal claim resolution. A Heggstad petition seeks a declaration that specific assets belong in the trust and can be more targeted than broad probate administration. Probate may be necessary for other assets or when creditors’ claims must be addressed, while negotiated resolutions can work when beneficiaries agree. Each route involves different timelines, fees, and levels of court involvement. Evaluating case specifics such as asset type, likely objections, and the settlor’s documented intent helps determine the most appropriate path.
A limited Heggstad petition is often appropriate when there is clear documentary evidence showing the decedent intended the asset to be part of the trust, such as a pour-over will, recent statements, or communications indicating intent. In such cases, a focused court proceeding to confirm ownership may be faster and less expensive than full probate. This path can resolve title problems for individual accounts or pieces of real property while allowing the trustee to proceed with administration without opening a lengthy probate case that addresses unrelated assets or claims.
When beneficiaries and potential claimants generally agree about the settlor’s intentions and there are no significant creditor issues, pursuing a targeted Heggstad petition can resolve the specific funding defect efficiently. This approach limits court involvement to the contested items and reduces costs, while still producing an enforceable court order that clarifies ownership. By avoiding comprehensive probate where possible, families can minimize delay and reduce the emotional and financial burden of estate administration, provided all interested parties receive proper notice and have had opportunity to respond.
A comprehensive approach, such as opening a probate estate or pursuing broader court oversight, may be necessary when the decedent left a complex mix of assets, unresolved creditor claims, or disputes among beneficiaries. In these scenarios, the court’s full involvement helps address claims, clear title, and oversee distribution under ironclad process that protects all parties. Handling multiple contested matters through a single comprehensive proceeding can sometimes streamline resolution, although it generally takes longer and involves more formal steps and court supervision than a focused Heggstad petition.
When documentation is inadequate, multiple parties contest ownership, or the settlor’s intent is ambiguous, a full probate or comprehensive petition may be necessary to sort competing claims and create an enforceable distribution plan. Courts can weigh evidence, adjudicate disputes, and issue orders that resolve title and beneficiary questions. Although this path involves greater expense and time, it can provide finality and reduce the likelihood of later re-litigation, particularly where asset values are substantial or relationships among heirs are strained.
A carefully planned comprehensive approach can bring clarity, legal protection, and better coordination among fiduciaries and beneficiaries. By addressing multiple potential issues together—such as creditor claims, title defects, and beneficiary objections—a unified legal strategy can reduce the risk of piecemeal challenges later. It can also provide clear court orders establishing property ownership and distribution paths that trustees can follow with confidence. For families seeking durable resolution, this approach can help ensure the settlor’s intentions are implemented in an orderly and legally defensible manner.
Comprehensive handling often improves communication among interested parties and creates an administrative record that supports trustee actions, reducing personal liability for fiduciaries. It can also produce efficiencies when multiple assets and claims are coordinated in a single proceeding, potentially lowering overall transactional uncertainty. When the stakes are high or the asset structure is complicated, investing in a broader legal approach can avoid repeated court interventions and help safeguard beneficiaries’ interests by resolving disputes and clarifying legal rights under California probate and trust law.
One major advantage of a comprehensive process is obtaining legal finality: court orders that resolve who owns specific assets and how those assets will be distributed under the trust or will. Clear title reduces the chances of future litigation and facilitates transfers or sales of property. For trustees, a definitive court ruling reduces personal risk when making distributions or selling assets, and for beneficiaries, it provides assurance that distributions are lawful and consistent with the decedent’s intentions. This legal clarity is especially important for high-value assets or contested matters.
Comprehensive proceedings allow the court to address conflicting claims in a single forum, bringing efficiency and consistency to the resolution process. When multiple parties assert rights to the same asset, a coordinated legal strategy helps prevent contradictory outcomes and ensures that all interests are fairly considered under the law. By compiling evidence, hearing objections, and issuing orders based on a complete record, the court can settle disputes that would otherwise lead to staggered litigation and ongoing uncertainty for trustees and beneficiaries.
Before filing a petition, collect all relevant documents such as the trust instrument, pour-over will, account statements, deeds, beneficiary designations, and recent correspondence. A comprehensive document package speeds the court process and strengthens the petition by showing the settlor’s intent and the nexus between the asset and the trust. Having organized records also makes it easier to provide required notices to interested parties and to respond to any questions the court might raise. Early preparation reduces delays and clarifies the factual basis for the requested relief.
When disputes among heirs or beneficiaries are foreseeable, explore negotiation or mediation before or during the petition process. Early settlement discussions can narrow contested issues, reduce litigation costs, and often lead to faster outcomes than contentious court battles. Mediation provides a confidential environment to resolve disagreements while preserving relationships. If a negotiated settlement is reached, the parties can present joint stipulations to the court that streamline the process and secure approval for transfers consistent with the settlor’s intent and the agreed resolution.
Consider a Heggstad petition when assets meant to be in a trust were not retitled and those assets are significant enough to justify court involvement. If the settlor left clear instructions in a trust or pour-over will, but the administrative act of transferring title was missed, a petition can align legal ownership with the written plan. This option is also appropriate when prompt resolution is needed to allow a trustee to manage or distribute assets for beneficiaries, pay debts, or settle ongoing financial matters relating to the decedent’s estate without opening a broader probate estate unnecessarily.
Another reason to file a Heggstad petition is to protect the trustee from liability when assets should, in fact, be administered under the trust’s terms. By securing a court order recognizing the trust’s ownership, trustees gain legal authority to act, reducing personal risk when distributing or managing assets. Parties who wish to minimize future disputes and provide transparency in the administration process will often pursue this petition to create a clear judicial record supporting the intended transfer and ensuring the settlor’s wishes are followed.
Typical circumstances include recently executed trusts where the settlor neglected to retitle bank accounts or property, accounts with outdated or conflicting beneficiary designations, or assets acquired close to the time of death that were never transferred. Also common are instances where a loved one had a pour-over will directing assets to a trust, but those assets remain in the decedent’s name. In all such cases, the Heggstad petition offers a way to confirm the settlor’s intent and bring those assets into trust administration for distribution according to the trust terms.
Real property that remains titled in the decedent’s name despite a trust provision allocating it to the trust commonly triggers a Heggstad petition. The petition asks the court to determine that real estate should be conveyed to the trustee under the trust terms. Resolving such title issues is important for tax planning, sale of property, or distribution to beneficiaries. A court order can direct the county recorder or involved parties to transfer the deed into the trust name or otherwise recognize the trust as the owner for settlement purposes.
Accounts that remain in the decedent’s name instead of the trust can complicate administration and delay distributions. A Heggstad petition can clarify that those accounts were intended to fund the trust, allowing the trustee to access funds for paying debts, taxes, and beneficiary distributions. Supporting documents such as statements, account change forms, or contemporaneous communications indicating the settlor’s plan strengthen the petition. Resolving account titling through court confirmation helps trustees act confidently and expediently on behalf of beneficiaries.
Assets acquired shortly before death—such as recently purchased vehicles, new retirement accounts, or insurance proceeds—sometimes remain outside the trust due to timing. When the settlor’s intent was to include these assets in the trust, a Heggstad petition can request judicial recognition that these items should be administered under the trust’s provisions. Timely action to document intent and initiate the petition helps prevent disputes and ensures that assets are distributed in line with the settlor’s overall estate plan rather than through unintended probate pathways.
The Law Offices of Robert P. Bergman serve Sunnyvale and the surrounding Santa Clara County communities with practical representation for trust funding disputes and Heggstad petitions. We help gather the necessary documents, prepare and file petitions, provide required notices, and represent clients in hearings. Our focus is on achieving clear court orders that allow trustees to administer the trust as intended and beneficiaries to receive their distributions. Responsive communication and careful preparation are central to our approach when clients face unresolved asset transfers at the end of life.
Clients who bring us Heggstad matters receive thorough case assessment and strategic planning tailored to the specific asset issues at hand. We prioritize collecting documentary evidence and framing the petition so the court can clearly see the settlor’s intent. By coordinating with trustees and family members early, we aim to minimize surprises and steer the process toward timely resolution. Our approach balances assertive advocacy with the practical goal of moving assets into trust administration without unnecessary delay or expense.
We also focus on ensuring proper notice and procedural correctness to build a strong administrative and legal record. That reduces the risk of post-order challenges and helps trustees execute their duties with confidence. Where disputes arise, we work to identify the key issues and explore settlement opportunities that serve the decedent’s intentions and beneficiaries’ interests. For matters that require court hearings, we prepare clear, well-documented submissions that present a compelling case for recognition of trust ownership.
Clients appreciate practical guidance about options, timelines, and likely outcomes based on the specific facts and local probate practice. Whether the matter calls for a targeted Heggstad petition or a more comprehensive estate process, we explain the advantages and trade-offs so decision-makers can choose the path that best protects the estate and beneficiary interests. Our goal is to secure reliable legal resolution so trustees can conclude administration and beneficiaries can receive their rightful distributions.
Our process begins with a careful review of the trust, will, asset records, and communications to assess whether a Heggstad petition is appropriate. We then identify interested parties, prepare the petition with supporting evidence, and file it in the appropriate county probate court. Throughout, we provide clear guidance on notice requirements and potential objections, and we coordinate with trustees to ensure proper administration. If the matter proceeds to hearing, we present the factual and legal basis for recognizing the asset as trust property and seek an order directing its transfer or treatment under the trust.
In the initial phase we gather the trust instrument, pour-over will, account statements, deeds, and any correspondence reflecting the settlor’s intent. We evaluate the legal status of each asset and determine whether the evidence supports a petition for court recognition. This stage includes identifying interested parties who must receive notice and anticipating potential objections. A thorough document review at the outset allows us to frame a focused petition and present the strongest possible record to the court for judicial confirmation of trust ownership.
We examine the trust instrument for language that demonstrates the settlor’s plan to include particular assets, and we cross-check that language against account records and deeds. A pour-over will may reinforce that intention, and contemporaneous statements can further support the claim. This review helps determine which assets are suitable for a Heggstad petition and which may require broader probate processes. Detailed analysis of documents reduces the risk of surprises and supports a clear, persuasive petition to the court.
Properly identifying beneficiaries, heirs, and potential creditors is critical because notice defects can jeopardize the petition. We prepare a comprehensive list of interested parties, confirm contact information, and ensure that statutory notice requirements are met. Clear notice protects parties’ rights and strengthens the enforceability of the resulting court order. Timely and accurate notification also reduces the chance of late objections that could delay or complicate the transfer of assets to the trust.
After collecting documents and identifying interested parties, we draft a petition that lays out the facts, cites relevant legal authority, and attaches supporting exhibits. The filing includes declarations that authenticate the documents and explain the connection between the asset and the trust. We file the petition in the appropriate probate division and serve required notices to interested parties. Careful drafting anticipates likely questions and frames the record for judicial review, which increases the chance that the court will order the asset to be treated as trust property.
We prepare sworn declarations from trustees, witnesses, or persons with knowledge that corroborate the settlor’s intent and the history of asset ownership. Exhibits such as deeds, statements, and the trust document are organized and indexed for the court. Presenting a well-organized evidentiary package makes it easier for the judge to understand the nexus between the asset and the trust and to issue a clear ruling. Solid declarations and exhibits reduce ambiguity and build a straightforward path to court confirmation.
Once the petition and supporting evidence are assembled, we file the paperwork with the probate court and serve copies on beneficiaries, heirs, and known creditors in accordance with statutory rules. Accurate filing and service ensure the court has jurisdiction and the process moves forward without procedural challenges. We monitor filing deadlines and proof-of-service requirements, and we update clients about scheduled hearings and opportunities to resolve matters through stipulation or settlement prior to a contested hearing.
If the matter proceeds to hearing, we present the case based on the record and address any objections. The court will evaluate the evidence of intent and ownership and decide whether to order the asset treated as trust property. If the court grants the petition, it issues an order directing the trustee or other parties to transfer title or recognize the trust’s ownership. That order becomes the basis for recording deeds, changing account titles, or making distributions as required by the trust terms.
At the hearing, the court considers declarations, exhibits, and any objections. We present a concise factual narrative supported by documentation to show that the settlor intended the trust to own the asset. If objections arise, we respond with legal argument and factual clarification to persuade the court. Successful presentation results in an order that clarifies ownership and provides trustees with the authority to proceed under the trust, reducing the likelihood of subsequent litigation over the same asset.
After obtaining a court order, we assist in implementing the transfer instructions, such as recording a new deed, changing account ownership, or coordinating with financial institutions. We ensure the necessary documents comply with recorder or custodian requirements for title changes and provide beneficiaries with updated information about the trust’s assets and distribution timeline. Completing these administrative steps turns the court’s decision into practical results, allowing trustees to manage and distribute assets according to the trust’s terms for the benefit of the named beneficiaries.
A Heggstad petition is a court proceeding asking a California probate court to declare that certain property belongs to a decedent’s trust even though the title or account name was not changed before death. It is used when documentation such as a trust instrument, pour-over will, or other records indicate the settlor intended the asset to be part of the trust, but administrative steps to retitle the asset were not completed. The petition requests a judicial determination that the asset should be treated as trust property for distribution or administration purposes. The petition is specific to the property at issue and is most effective when the settlor’s intent is well documented. It differs from ordinary probate in that it seeks recognition of trust ownership rather than full probate administration. Filing a well-supported petition can allow trustees to access and manage assets under trust terms, reduce delays, and create a clear legal basis for transfers, especially when documentation demonstrates the settlor’s intentions.
A Heggstad petition focuses on recognizing particular assets as belonging to a trust despite title defects, while probate is a broader court process for administering a decedent’s estate, paying creditors, and distributing assets under a will or intestacy rules. Probate can address many estate-wide issues including creditor claims and distribution of property that does not pass by trust or beneficiary designation. In contrast, the Heggstad petition targets ownership questions to bring specific assets into trust administration, which can be faster and more limited in scope. Choosing between a Heggstad petition and probate depends on the nature of the assets, the clarity of the settlor’s documentation, and potential creditor or beneficiary disputes. When most assets are already in a trust except for a few items, a targeted petition often makes sense. However, if debts or multiple contested claims exist, a probate proceeding may be necessary to comprehensively resolve those matters under court supervision.
Successful petitions typically include the trust document that establishes the settlor’s plan, a pour-over will if applicable, account statements or deeds showing the asset, and declarations from trustees or witnesses describing the settlor’s intent and the history of asset ownership. Additional supporting evidence like communications, trust funding records, or contemporaneous instructions can strengthen the case. The combination of documents should create a clear factual link between the asset and the trust. The more documentary support available, the better the petition will present to the court. Where documents are sparse, credible sworn declarations may help fill gaps, but courts will weigh the totality of evidence to determine whether the asset should be treated as trust property. Preparing a thorough evidentiary record early improves the prospects for a favorable court ruling and minimizes the risk of contested hearings.
Interested parties typically include beneficiaries named in the trust and will, heirs who might otherwise inherit, the personal representative if an estate exists, and known creditors. California statutes require specific notice procedures to be followed so those parties have an opportunity to object or participate. Proper identification and service of notice documents are critical because they ensure the court’s jurisdiction and make the resulting order enforceable against those parties. Providing accurate notice helps prevent later procedural challenges that could undermine the petition. We assist clients in compiling a list of required recipients, preparing proof of service, and ensuring that statutory timelines are met. Effective notice also promotes transparency and allows parties to raise legitimate concerns early in the process, which can sometimes lead to negotiated resolutions without a contested hearing.
Yes, beneficiaries or other interested parties may object to a Heggstad petition if they believe the asset should not be treated as trust property or if they dispute the settlor’s intent. Objections must be filed with the court and supported by evidence. Common grounds for objection include assertions that the trust document does not apply to the asset, competing beneficiary claims, or concerns about creditor rights. When objections arise, the court will consider competing evidence to determine the proper outcome. If objections are asserted, the process may involve additional discovery, evidentiary hearings, or settlement discussions. Preparing a robust evidentiary record in advance and attempting to address potential objections through negotiation can reduce the likelihood of prolonged litigation. In many cases, careful documentation and transparent communication with interested parties lowers the chance of unresolved disputes.
The timeline for resolution varies depending on the complexity of the evidence, the number and nature of objections, and local court schedules. A straightforward Heggstad petition with clear documentation and no objections can be resolved in a matter of weeks to a few months, while contested matters or those requiring additional discovery can take much longer. Court calendars and procedural steps, including required notice periods, also affect timing. To avoid unnecessary delay, it is important to prepare and serve all required notices promptly and to collect evidence before filing. Early identification of potential objections and proactive outreach to interested parties can sometimes shorten the process. Clients should expect realistic timelines and plan for contingencies when other estate matters, such as creditor claims, could affect scheduling.
A favorable court order granting a Heggstad petition provides a strong legal basis for recognizing and transferring the asset to the trustee or treating it as trust property. While that order generally compels the necessary transfer steps, practical implementation may require coordination with financial institutions, county recorders, or other custodians to change titles or records. We assist clients in executing the administrative steps required to convert the court order into completed transfers, such as recording deeds or updating account ownership information. Although the court order is authoritative, third parties may have procedural requirements before they accept the transfer. Our role includes ensuring compliance with those requirements and working with institutions to complete the transfer so the trustee can administer the asset under the trust. In rare cases where third parties resist, further legal steps can enforce the court’s order.
Alternatives include negotiating with financial institutions or beneficiaries to obtain voluntary transfers, using informal settlement agreements, or resolving title issues through other probate mechanisms when appropriate. In some instances, minor corrections can be accomplished by presenting documentation directly to banks or recorders without court involvement. Mediation or negotiated settlement among beneficiaries can also prevent formal litigation and achieve a mutually agreeable outcome for asset distribution. However, when voluntary transfers are not possible or when dispute risks exist, a Heggstad petition provides a legal pathway to resolve ownership questions. Choosing the alternative that best fits each situation depends on the strength of documentation, the willingness of third parties to cooperate, and whether stakeholders prefer a private settlement or a court-ordered resolution for lasting certainty.
Common asset types that prompt Heggstad petitions include real property left in the decedent’s name, bank and brokerage accounts that were not retitled into the trust, and newly acquired assets that were never transferred. Retirement accounts, life insurance proceeds, and business interests may also raise questions when beneficiary designations or titles do not reflect the trust plan. Vehicles or other titled personal property can likewise require judicial recognition to align ownership with trust documents. Each asset type may present different evidentiary challenges, such as recorded deeds for real property or account statements for financial accounts. Preparing appropriate supporting exhibits and declarations tailored to the asset involved improves the petition’s chance of success and helps ensure the trustee can assume control and manage or distribute the property according to the trust’s provisions.
Costs vary depending on the complexity of the petition, the amount of evidence required, whether objections arise, and the need for hearings. For straightforward matters with clear documentation and no objections, costs are typically lower because preparation and court time are limited. More complex or contested petitions require additional attorney time, possible discovery, and extended court appearances, increasing total expense. We provide candid assessments of likely costs after an initial review of the facts and documents. Clients can often reduce overall costs by preparing documentation in advance, pursuing early resolution with interested parties, and focusing the petition on the specific items in question. We discuss fee structures, estimated timelines, and cost-saving strategies during the initial consultation so clients can make informed decisions about the best path forward for resolving trust funding issues.
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