A Heggstad petition can be the remedy when real property or other assets were intended to be placed in a living trust but were never properly transferred. If you are in Vacaville or elsewhere in Solano County and discovered that a home, parcel, or other titled asset was left out of a trust, a Heggstad petition asks the court to find that the asset belonged to the trust as of the date of the grantor’s death. This process helps clarify title, let successor trustees manage or sell property according to the trust, and reduce the need for formal probate. The Law Offices of Robert P. Bergman assists clients with the factual assembly and legal filing needed to pursue a petition.
When property was intended to be transferred into a trust but the transfer paperwork was never completed, families face uncertainty about who controls or inherits that asset. A Heggstad petition presents evidence such as the trust document, deeds, escrow instructions, correspondence, and witness statements to show the grantor’s intent and actual ownership at death. The goal is a court declaration that the property belonged to the trust, which allows recording appropriate documents to reflect the trust as owner. Clients benefit from careful preparation, precise pleadings, and clear evidence to minimize delays and avoid later title disputes in the Solano County records.
Filing a Heggstad petition can restore the intended operation of a trust by confirming that omitted property was held in trust when the grantor died. This legal route preserves the grantor’s planning, enables successor trustees to manage or distribute assets without full probate, and clarifies title for lenders, buyers, and county recorders. The process reduces administrative friction, protects beneficiaries’ interests, and can prevent future litigation over ownership. In many cases, a successful petition avoids the time and expense of a formal probate administration, provides peace of mind, and allows the estate to be settled in line with the grantor’s documented wishes and the trust instrument’s instructions.
The Law Offices of Robert P. Bergman provides estate planning and trust administration services to clients in Vacaville and throughout California. We focus on careful document review, factual investigation, and practical solutions for situations where trust funding was incomplete. Our approach emphasizes thorough preparation of pleadings, collection of documentary evidence, and coordination with title companies and county recorders to resolve ownership issues efficiently. We work with families to explain options, plan next steps, and pursue the legal filings necessary to confirm trust ownership and move property into the trust record, keeping clients informed at every stage.
A Heggstad petition is a judicial procedure used in California to establish that property which appears to be owned by an individual at death was in fact the grantor’s trust property. The petition relies on evidence showing the grantor’s intent and actions demonstrating that the asset was meant to be trust property, such as signed but not recorded deeds, escrow instructions, trust provisions, or contemporaneous correspondence. The court examines whether the evidence meets the legal standard to declare the trust as the owner, after which the necessary documents can be recorded to reflect trust title. This mechanism helps achieve the original estate planning goals without full probate.
Not every omitted asset requires a Heggstad petition. Sometimes deeds can be corrected, affidavits can be used, or informal transfer procedures suffice, depending on the asset type and the county requirements. When title companies, banks, or third parties require a court order to accept the trust as owner, a petition becomes the appropriate tool. The process involves gathering witness statements and documentary proof, preparing a petition with supporting exhibits, filing with the appropriate probate court, and attending any required hearing. Success depends on clear factual proof of the grantor’s intention and contemporaneous steps toward transferring the asset into the trust.
A Heggstad petition asks the probate court to declare that a particular asset belonged to the trust at the time of the grantor’s death, even though public records may show the asset in the grantor’s name. The petition submits evidence such as the trust agreement, signed but unrecorded transfer documents, beneficiary designations, escrow paperwork, tax records, and testimony that demonstrate an intent to transfer. The ruling enables successor trustees to treat the asset as trust property for management and distribution purposes. Essentially, the petition aligns public title with the grantor’s documented estate plan and the trust’s terms.
When evaluating a Heggstad petition, the court looks to whether the grantor intended the asset to be a part of the trust and whether sufficient acts toward that transfer occurred. Relevant elements include the trust document, any written transfer instructions, deeds or documents left unsigned or unrecorded, communications with financial institutions or escrow, and witness declarations that corroborate the grantor’s intent. The petition must present a coherent factual narrative and admissible evidence. After a hearing, if the court grants the petition, the order provides the basis for recording the judgment or other instruments to reflect trust ownership and resolve title defects.
Understanding common terms helps clients follow the petition process and know what documents to gather. Key items to review include trust instrument language, deeds, escrow files, beneficiary designations, successor trustee powers, and court filings. Getting organized early and locating contemporaneous documents such as correspondence, receipts, or drafts of transfer instruments strengthens a petition. This glossary section defines the most frequently used words and concepts so clients know what to expect during investigation, pleading, and court proceedings when seeking recognition that omitted property belonged to a trust at death.
The trust instrument is the written document that creates the living trust and sets forth the grantor’s instructions for asset ownership, management, and distribution. It names the trustee, successor trustees, beneficiaries, and outlines trustee powers and duties. In a Heggstad petition, the trust document is central because it expresses the grantor’s clear intent for trust ownership and distribution. The trust may also include schedules or references to property intended to fund the trust. Providing a complete and signed trust instrument is a foundational step for any petition seeking to confirm that an asset belonged to the trust at death.
A Heggstad petition is a probate court filing used to prove that property belonging to a deceased person was actually intended to be part of their trust despite not being formally transferred prior to death. Named after a California case, the petition presents evidence showing the grantor’s intent and steps taken toward funding the trust. The court assesses documentary and testimonial proof and may issue an order declaring the trust as owner, permitting recording of that order and any necessary corrective documents to align public records with the trust’s terms and the grantor’s planning objectives.
Deeds and transfer documents are instruments used to convey title to real property. For Heggstad matters, these documents might include signed but unrecorded deeds, drafts, or escrow instructions that show an intent to move property into the trust. The absence of recorded deeds often triggers the need for a petition. The court will consider the timing, signatures, and surrounding circumstances of any drafts or signed instruments as part of the evidence that the grantor intended and acted to make the trust the owner of the property prior to death.
A successor trustee is the individual or entity named in the trust to step into the trustee role after the original trustee’s death or incapacity. In the context of a Heggstad petition, the successor trustee typically files the petition to establish trust title so that they can manage, sell, or distribute the asset according to the trust terms. The successor trustee must present evidence supporting the grantor’s intent and the factual basis for the transfer. The court’s ruling allows the successor trustee to act with clear title documentation for trust-owned property.
A Heggstad petition is generally focused on achieving a judicial finding that mirrors the grantor’s intent, which is particularly useful when third parties will not accept informal proof. Other remedies may work when clear documentation and cooperation exist. For example, if a mortgage lender or title company accepts an affidavit, recording can be straightforward; however, lenders often want a court order for real property title changes. A careful review of available evidence, likely objections, and county recording requirements will determine whether a petition is the most reliable and efficient means to align property records with the trust.
A limited approach may be appropriate when the omitted asset is an item that does not require a recorded deed, such as certain bank accounts, personal belongings, or accounts that permit beneficiary designations. If documentation and institutions involved will accept an affidavit or beneficiary form, formal court action might not be necessary. In these cases, gathering clear proof of ownership, beneficiary designations, and the trust document may be enough to arrange transfer without a petition, saving time and court costs while still achieving the practical result of transferring property to the intended recipients.
When all interested parties, including beneficiaries and successor trustees, agree on the intended disposition and a title company or financial institution accepts substitute proof, a limited remedy such as corrective recording or a transfer affidavit may suffice. Consensus reduces the likelihood of formal opposition and can streamline administrative transfer. Nonetheless, even with agreement, some third parties may insist on court confirmation for real property, and the choice between an informal remedy and a petition should be made after confirming what documentation recorders or title insurers will accept.
A full legal process, including a Heggstad petition, is often required when title companies, lenders, or government agencies refuse to recognize the trust without a court order. These third parties may insist on a judicial determination for real property to ensure clear marketable title. In such situations, filing a petition and obtaining a court order removes ambiguity and provides an authoritative basis for recording the property under the trust name. Undertaking the comprehensive route avoids future disputes that could arise when title remains inconsistent with the trust’s terms.
When beneficiaries, heirs, or other parties dispute ownership or the grantor’s intent, a court process becomes necessary to adjudicate those claims and provide a binding determination. A Heggstad petition creates an official record and invites the court to weigh evidence and issue a ruling, thereby preventing lingering disputes and protecting successor trustees who must act on trust assets. Where competing claims exist or the factual record is contested, comprehensive legal representation helps assemble persuasive documentation and present the case clearly to the probate court.
Pursuing a comprehensive route, including a well-prepared Heggstad petition, offers legal certainty by obtaining a court order that aligns title with the trust instrument. This approach reduces future challenges, enables successor trustees to exercise their duties with confidence, and facilitates clean recordation with county offices or title companies. A complete process also addresses any ancillary steps such as corrective deeds, recordings, and coordination with financial institutions, so the trust functions as the grantor intended and beneficiaries receive assets according to established trust terms.
A comprehensive process can also streamline closing the trust by addressing multiple omitted assets in a coordinated way, resolving disputes proactively, and compiling documentation to satisfy third‑party requirements. That thoroughness can minimize downstream expense and delay by preventing the need for subsequent court filings. Ensuring that title and records reflect trust ownership protects future transactions involving the property, including refinancing or sale, and maintains the integrity of the estate plan across the full administration period.
One of the main benefits of pursuing a full petition and follow‑up recordation is achieving clear title that third parties will accept. For real estate, an order recognizing the trust as owner permits recording of the court order and corrected documents, which makes the property marketable for sale or refinancing. Clear title protects beneficiaries from later disputes and reassures buyers and lenders. Preparing the necessary documentation and following court procedures provides a reliable path to align public records with the trust, improving the asset’s usability and value.
A thorough legal process provides successor trustees and beneficiaries with confidence about ownership and distribution rights. Court confirmation empowers trustees to manage, sell, or distribute assets according to the trust without concern for future legal challenges. That certainty simplifies administration tasks and reduces the risk of costly disputes or title problems down the line. For families seeking to implement the grantor’s wishes and finalize financial affairs, a comprehensive approach offers predictable outcomes and greater peace of mind during what can be a stressful transition period.
Before starting a petition, collect the trust instrument, all deeds, escrow files, bank statements, beneficiary forms, and any correspondence that shows the grantor’s intent. Photocopy drafts or signed copies of deeds, escrow instructions, and closing statements. Statements from banks or title companies, as well as emails or letters indicating a plan to transfer property into the trust, can be persuasive. Organizing documentation early reduces investigation time, clarifies the factual story for the court, and helps identify which assets may require formal court action versus administrative fixes.
Statements from witnesses, such as persons present when the grantor announced trust intentions or professionals who worked on the estate plan, add persuasive weight to a petition. Gather written statements, affidavits, or declarations describing conversations, actions taken to prepare deeds, and the grantor’s consistent plan to fund the trust. Contemporaneous acts like signed drafts, escrow instructions, or instruction to advisors are strong evidence of intent. Preserving those facts helps the court understand the grantor’s purpose and supports a successful petition outcome.
You may want to consider a Heggstad petition when a significant asset, particularly real property, appears in the decedent’s name but was intended to be in the trust. This situation commonly arises when deeds were prepared but not recorded or when transfers were started but not completed before death. If title problems create obstacles to selling, refinancing, or transferring property to beneficiaries, a petition can provide the legal clarity necessary to proceed. Taking action sooner rather than later reduces the risk that intervening events complicate the matter and helps preserve the grantor’s planning goals for family members.
A petition is also appropriate when third parties will not accept informal proof of trust ownership, or when heirs or beneficiaries disagree about the property’s intended disposition. It provides a neutral judicial determination based on evidence rather than relying on informal agreements that may lack enforceability. For trustees who need authority to manage or liquidate assets, a court order confirming trust ownership supplies the documentation required by financial institutions and county recorders and builds the legal record to support trustee actions under the trust terms.
Common circumstances include homes or other real property prepared for trust transfer but left in the decedent’s name, bank accounts without updated beneficiary designations, partnership interests not retitled to the trust, or vehicles and investment accounts omitted from schedules. Mistakes or oversights during trust funding, changes in title after trust creation, and last‑minute property acquisitions can all result in assets not appearing in trust records. Each situation requires a fact‑specific review to determine whether administrative steps suffice or whether a Heggstad petition is the appropriate solution to confirm trust ownership.
A frequent scenario is a house purchased or retained in the grantor’s individual name rather than the trust, sometimes due to an oversight or a failed recording at closing. When a property remains titled to the decedent, lenders, title insurers, and buyers typically ask for clear title. A Heggstad petition seeks a court declaration that the property was intended to be held by the trust, allowing successor trustees to record the court order and title documents that reflect the trust as owner. This clarifies legal ownership and enables efficient administration or sale of the property.
Sometimes a deed was prepared and even signed but never recorded, leaving public records inconsistent with the grantor’s intentions. The absence of recordation can occur because a closing did not finish, paperwork was misplaced, or there was confusion about the correct transfer steps. A Heggstad petition compiles the unrecorded deed, escrow materials, and other supporting documents to demonstrate that the transfer was intended and effectively completed as of the grantor’s death. The court decision then provides a basis for recording the appropriate documents to reflect trust ownership.
Occasionally the records present conflicting indications of ownership, such as a trust schedule listing an asset while the county records show individual ownership. Conflicting documentation may include old deeds, updated beneficiary forms, or contradictory affidavits. Resolving these conflicts through a Heggstad petition gives the court the opportunity to weigh the documents and declarations and issue a definitive ruling. The outcome helps remove ambiguity, aligns records with the trust terms, and provides the legal foundation for trustee actions on behalf of beneficiaries.
Our office assists residents of Vacaville, Solano County, and adjacent California counties with Heggstad petitions, trust funding matters, and related estate administration. We help identify omitted assets, evaluate documentary proof, and coordinate with title companies, escrow offices, and county recorders to achieve clear title under the trust. Whether the issue involves a family home, investment property, or other titled asset, we aim to resolve omissions efficiently, reduce administrative friction, and preserve the grantor’s intentions so successors can manage and distribute assets according to the trust document.
Families choose the Law Offices of Robert P. Bergman for our methodical approach to trust funding issues and court filings related to omitted property. We focus on compiling clear factual records, preparing persuasive petitions, and coordinating follow‑up steps such as recording judgments and corrective deeds. Our goal is to obtain court decisions that third parties will accept and to complete the administrative tasks that restore title to the trust, enabling successor trustees to act with authority and beneficiaries to move forward with distributions or sales as directed by the trust.
When handling Heggstad matters we prioritize open communication and practical planning. We explain the likely documentary needs, county recording procedures in Solano and neighboring counties, and how to gather evidence to support a petition. We also assess whether alternative remedies could be acceptable and advise on minimizing litigation risk. By providing clear timelines and anticipated steps, we help families make informed decisions about whether to pursue a petition or pursue an alternate administrative route that accomplishes the same result with less court involvement.
Our work includes post‑hearing tasks such as preparing and recording corrective deeds, delivering certified copies of orders to title companies, and assisting successor trustees with the mechanics of trust administration after title issues are resolved. We seek to close gaps between intent and recorded reality so that property once intended for the trust operates as part of that plan. For clients in Vacaville and the region, that means practical problem solving, coordinated filings, and managed expectations during the legal process necessary to confirm trust ownership.
The process begins with an intake and document review to identify what property was omitted and to assemble supporting evidence such as trust documents, deeds, escrow files, and communications. After clarifying whether a petition is required, we prepare the petition with supporting declarations and exhibits, coordinate service on interested parties, and file with the probate court in the county where the property is located. If the court sets a hearing, we present the factual basis for the petition and address any objections. After a favorable ruling, we record the order and complete steps needed to transfer title into the trust and finalize related administrative tasks.
This initial stage focuses on gathering the trust document, deed history, escrow materials, and any other contemporaneous records that show intent to transfer property into the trust. We interview witnesses, obtain declarations, and review county recorder records to map the title history. The assessment determines whether a petition is likely required, estimates possible objections, and identifies the best way to present evidence to the court. Clear organization of documents at this stage is essential to building a persuasive case to support a court’s declaration of trust ownership.
Collecting robust documentary evidence includes locating the trust instrument, any signed but unrecorded deeds, escrow and closing papers, correspondence regarding transfers, and bank or brokerage records. We also identify witnesses who can testify about the grantor’s intent and actions. This documentary foundation helps demonstrate steps taken toward funding the trust and provides the court with a clear record. The more complete the evidence, the stronger the petition’s likelihood of success and the fewer follow‑up disputes that arise after the court’s determination.
Early outreach to title companies, lenders, and county recorders clarifies what form of court order or documents they will accept to change title. Knowing those requirements informs how the petition is drafted and what remedial steps will be necessary after a ruling. This assessment can determine whether a limited administrative remedy will suffice or whether a petition is the most reliable path to secure acceptance by third parties and effectuate recording. That practical coordination reduces surprises later in the process.
Once the evidence is organized, we draft the petition, declarations, and supporting exhibits to present a clear factual narrative to the probate court. The filing includes a proposed order for the judge, service documents for interested parties, and any required filing fees. Attention to procedural rules, evidentiary support, and clear legal argument helps the court understand why a declaration aligning title with the trust is appropriate. Properly presented materials reduce the chance of procedural objections and advance the case toward a hearing on the merits.
Declarations are prepared from witnesses and from the successor trustee that explain the grantor’s intent and outline the timeline of events leading to the omission. Exhibits include copies of deeds, escrow paperwork, correspondence, and the trust instrument. Those supporting materials must be organized and authenticated so the court can evaluate them at the hearing. Clear, well‑declared evidence enhances credibility and helps the court reach a reasoned determination regarding trust ownership of the disputed asset.
After preparing pleadings and exhibits, we file the petition with the probate court in the appropriate county and serve all required parties, including heirs and potential claimants. Proper notice procedures reduce the risk of default challenges and ensure interested parties have an opportunity to respond. Timely service and compliance with local rules are important to moving the matter to hearing. We track deadlines and respond to any procedural issues so the case remains on schedule toward a court determination.
At the hearing, the court reviews declarations, exhibits, and any opposition to determine whether the evidence establishes that the asset belonged to the trust at death. If the court grants the petition, we prepare and submit the final order, obtain certified copies, and coordinate recording with county offices and title companies. Post‑judgment tasks often include recording corrected deeds, notifying financial institutions, and updating trust schedules. Completing these steps ensures the property is reflected in records as trust property and allows the trustee to manage or distribute the asset per the trust.
During the hearing, the court examines the factual record, testimony, and written declarations to decide whether the evidence meets the legal standard for declaring the trust as owner. We present a cohesive narrative supported by documents and witness statements, and we address any factual challenges raised by opposing parties. Where necessary, the court may ask for supplemental evidence or clarifications. A well‑prepared presentation focusing on credible documentation increases the likelihood of a favorable ruling that third parties will trust for recording purposes.
If the court grants the petition, we obtain certified copies of the order and prepare any corrective deeds or recording documents needed for the county recorder or title company. We coordinate with title officers to secure endorsements and ensure the property transfer is reflected in the public record. Additional follow‑up may include notifying banks or other institutions, updating asset schedules, and advising the successor trustee on management and distribution actions consistent with the trust terms. These administrative steps complete the transition of the asset into the trust.
A Heggstad petition is a court filing that asks the probate court to declare that an asset which appears to be owned by a deceased person was actually intended to be part of their living trust. This petition relies on documentary and testimonial evidence showing the grantor’s intent and acts toward transferring the asset into the trust before death. The remedy is commonly used when deeds were prepared but not recorded, or when title remains in the decedent’s name despite trust provisions designating the asset as trust property. A petition is appropriate where third parties, such as title companies or lenders, require formal judicial confirmation of trust ownership before accepting a transfer. It provides a clear legal basis for recording corrected documents and enables successor trustees to manage or distribute the asset according to the trust. The court evaluates the totality of the evidence to determine whether the trust should be recognized as owner at the time of death.
The timeline for a Heggstad petition varies based on the complexity of the factual record, the county court’s calendar, and whether there are objections. The initial document review and evidence gathering can take several weeks, and filing to hearing could take a few months in many counties. If the case proceeds without opposition, the court may schedule a hearing more quickly, although local court backlogs affect scheduling. If objections arise, additional time is required for discovery or supplemental declarations. After a hearing and a favorable ruling, subsequent recording and administrative tasks add time before title is fully updated. Clients should expect a process measured in months rather than days, with specific timelines depending on local practices and the case’s complexity.
Not always. Some omitted assets can be corrected through administrative measures such as corrective deeds executed by living grantors, affidavits of title, or beneficiary designation updates for accounts that allow them. Where banks or title companies accept those documents, court proceedings may be unnecessary. The viability of an administrative fix depends on the asset type, whether a deed must be recorded, and the acceptance policies of third parties involved. However, when the grantor is deceased and third parties refuse to accept informal proof, or when there are competing claims or title company requirements for a court order, a petition becomes the reliable method to secure an authoritative judicial determination that aligns title with the trust. Assessing which path is appropriate requires a careful review of records and third‑party requirements.
Typically the successor trustee named in the trust files a Heggstad petition to have the court declare that omitted assets belonged to the trust at the time of the grantor’s death. In situations where no trustee is available or conflicts exist among interested parties, an interested person with standing under probate rules may file to protect estate or trust interests. The petitioner must provide notice to heirs, beneficiaries, and other interested parties required by the court. Because procedural rules govern who may bring a petition and how interested parties are served, coordinating with counsel or the probate court clerk to confirm standing and notice obligations is important. Proper service and compliance with local rules reduce the risk of delays or challenges to the petition’s procedural foundation.
A Heggstad petition can avoid the need for a full probate administration for the specific asset at issue by providing a judicial finding that the asset belonged to the trust, allowing recording and transfer without opening probate. That outcome preserves the trust plan for the omitted property and enables trustees to act without the formal probate process for that item. However, whether probate is avoided overall depends on the estate’s full inventory of assets and whether other assets require probate procedures. If multiple assets were omitted or if heirs contest other matters unrelated to the petition, additional proceedings could be necessary. The petition’s purpose is to align title with the trust for the contested asset; when successful, it often eliminates the need for probate for that item but does not automatically resolve unrelated estate administration needs.
Persuasive evidence includes the trust instrument showing the grantor’s plan, signed but unrecorded deeds, escrow instructions, closing statements, correspondence with advisors about transferring assets to the trust, and declarations from witnesses familiar with the grantor’s intent. Bank or broker records and contemporaneous notes that corroborate the transfer plan also strengthen a filing. The court focuses on whether the proof collectively demonstrates that the grantor intended and took steps to make the trust the owner at death. Clear chronological documentation and authenticated statements from witnesses who can describe the grantor’s actions and intent are highly useful. Organized exhibits and credible declarations that tie the documents together into a consistent factual narrative give the court a reliable basis for declaring trust ownership.
Title companies sometimes accept alternative documentation such as corrected deeds, affidavits, or indemnity forms in limited circumstances when there is clear evidence and agreement among interested parties. Whether a title company will accept those measures depends on its underwriting guidelines and risk tolerance. For minor discrepancies or uncontested matters, administrative corrections may be feasible without court involvement, particularly when living grantors can execute corrective instruments. When a title company or lender requires a judicial order for real property or when there are potential claims from heirs, a Heggstad petition becomes necessary. Early contact with the title company helps clarify their requirements so the proper remedy — administrative or judicial — is chosen from the outset.
Common objections include disputes about the grantor’s intent, competing claims to the asset, or challenges to the authenticity of documents. Objecting parties may request additional discovery or cross‑examination of declarations. When objections arise, the court may schedule further hearings, require documentary supplementation, or order limited discovery to resolve factual disputes. Addressing objections typically requires additional factual support and clear evidentiary presentation to show why the petition should be granted despite opposing claims. Where opposition is grounded in misunderstandings or incomplete records, careful explanation and additional evidence often resolve issues. In more contested cases, litigation steps may extend timelines and require strategic responses, but a well‑prepared petition and timely rebuttal of objections improve the prospect of a favorable ruling.
Costs for a Heggstad petition vary based on the scope of document collection, whether litigation steps are needed, court filing fees, and any title company or recording charges. Simple, uncontested matters with well‑documented evidence will generally cost less than contested petitions that require depositions, multiple hearings, or extended discovery. The location of the property and local court practices also affect expenses. Obtaining an estimate after an initial review of documents offers the best way to anticipate costs. Because post‑judgment tasks like recording corrected deeds and coordinating with title companies are also part of the process, those associated administrative fees should be included in the budget. Discussing fee estimates and likely costs up front helps clients plan and weigh whether a petition or an alternative remedy is the most cost‑effective route.
Yes. Beneficiaries or heirs can oppose a Heggstad petition if they contend the asset was not intended for the trust or if they assert competing ownership claims. When opposition occurs, the court will consider the arguments from both sides and evaluate the documentary and testimonial evidence. Opposition can prolong the process, as additional evidence and potential discovery may be required to resolve factual disputes about intent and ownership. If the court finds the petition is supported by a preponderance of credible evidence showing the grantor’s intent to fund the trust, the order may be issued despite objections. Where disputes remain unresolved, the court’s ruling provides an authoritative resolution, but contested cases may necessitate careful litigation management and additional legal work to protect the trust’s and beneficiaries’ interests.
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