If you are considering changes to an existing trust in Boyes Hot Springs, a trust modification petition can allow the court to authorize updates when informal amendment methods are unavailable or disputed. At the Law Offices of Robert P. Bergman we help clients review the trust document, analyze whether a petition is the appropriate path, and explain potential outcomes under California law. Whether the changes stem from changed family circumstances, unforeseen tax consequences, or drafting errors, we will walk through the steps so you understand options and likely timelines while protecting the intent of the settlor and the interests of beneficiaries.
Trust modification petitions are often sought when parties cannot reach agreement or when the original trust lacks clear amendment language. Filing a petition invites the probate court to interpret the trust, approve modifications, or resolve disputes about trustee authority and beneficiary rights. Our approach focuses on careful document review and practical planning to pursue an outcome aligned with court standards and the settlor’s objectives. Throughout the process we prioritize communication, clear explanations of legal standards, and a strategy that considers alternatives such as trust reformation, decanting, or negotiated settlements when appropriate for resolving contested matters.
A properly prepared trust modification petition can protect the intent behind a trust while addressing contemporary needs that were not anticipated when the trust was created. Benefits include clarifying ambiguous provisions, correcting drafting errors, updating distributions to reflect family changes, and resolving conflicts about trustee powers. When informal revisions are not possible, a court-ordered modification provides legal certainty and enforceability. Having skilled legal guidance helps ensure petitions are grounded in the governing trust document and California law, reducing the risk of future disputes and improving the likelihood that courts will approve terms that honor the settlor’s wishes.
The Law Offices of Robert P. Bergman has provided estate planning and trust litigation services to clients throughout California, including Sonoma County and Boyes Hot Springs. Our attorneys focus on practical, client-centered representation across a range of trust matters such as revocable living trusts, trust modification petitions, Heggstad petitions, and trust administration disputes. We combine careful analysis of estate documents with courtroom experience when petitions require judicial approval. Our team works closely with clients to develop strategies that are legally sound and tailored to family dynamics, financial considerations, and long-term planning goals.
A trust modification petition asks a court to change the terms of an existing trust when circumstances make formal judicial approval necessary. California trust law provides several pathways for modification, including petitions based on the settlor’s intent, mistake, or inability to amend the trust directly. Common reasons for petitions include clarifying ambiguous language, addressing drafting errors, removing or replacing trustees, or modifying distribution provisions to reflect new realities. The petition process requires careful factual development, supporting evidence, and legal argument demonstrating why the court should grant the requested change consistent with the trust instrument and applicable statutes.
Before filing a petition, many parties explore alternatives such as negotiated modifications among beneficiaries, trustee actions authorized by the trust, or nonjudicial settlement agreements when permitted. When agreement cannot be reached, or when the trust lacks the necessary provisions for nonjudicial change, a petition becomes the practical option. The court will consider the settlor’s probable intent, whether the proposed modification is equitable, and whether it aligns with statutory requirements. The process typically includes pleadings, notice to interested persons, discovery if contested, and possibly hearings to resolve disputed factual or legal issues.
A trust modification petition is a formal request to the probate court asking for a judicial order amending specific terms of a trust document. Petitioners must articulate the proposed changes and explain the legal and factual bases that justify modification, such as removing ambiguities, correcting mistakes, or addressing changed circumstances that frustrate the trust’s original purpose. The court evaluates whether the modification is consistent with the settlor’s probable intent and whether it serves the interests of the beneficiaries. If granted, the court issues an order that becomes part of the trust’s enforceable record and guides future administration.
Successful petitions typically include a clear statement of the proposed modification, supporting evidence describing why the change is necessary or proper, legal argument citing relevant California statutes and case law, and formal notices to trustees and beneficiaries. The process involves preparing pleadings, serving interested parties, engaging in discovery when issues are disputed, and presenting the case at hearing. Courts will weigh credibility of evidence, the settlor’s intent, and whether the modification aligns with the trust’s overall purpose. Effective petitions are factual, well-documented, and framed to minimize downstream disputes during administration.
Understanding the terminology used in trust modification matters helps clients follow the process and evaluate options. Important terms include settlor, trustee, beneficiary, revocable living trust, Heggstad petition, decanting, reformation, nonjudicial settlement agreement, and pour-over will. Each term reflects a different aspect of trust law and administration, and knowing what they mean clarifies the remedies available when modifications are sought. Clear definitions reduce confusion and support informed decision-making throughout any petition or dispute resolution process.
The settlor is the person who creates the trust and transfers assets into it. The settlor’s intent, as reflected in the trust document and surrounding circumstances, is central to petitions seeking modification or reformation. Courts strive to honor the settlor’s probable intent, balancing the written terms with evidence of what the settlor intended when ambiguous or erroneous provisions are challenged. Understanding who the settlor is and the context in which the trust was created helps frame legal arguments and fact development in modification proceedings.
Reformation is a judicial remedy that corrects mistakes in a trust’s written terms so they reflect the settlor’s actual intent. When clear evidence shows that a drafting error produced language that differs from the settlor’s intentions, a court may reform the instrument to align with those intentions. Reformation petitions require persuasive evidence, often including drafts, correspondence, or testimony about the settlor’s expectations. Courts will not rewrite a trust to create new provisions; reformation strictly seeks to correct a writing error to reflect the original, intended terms.
A Heggstad petition is used in California to ask the court to determine whether a transfer made outside the trust should be treated as trust property for purposes of trust administration. Commonly filed when assets were not properly titled into a trust, the petition allows the court to declare those assets subject to the trust, facilitating proper distribution and administration. Heggstad proceedings often accompany trust modification matters when funding errors or omitted assets affect the trust’s operation and distribution scheme.
Decanting refers to the process where a trustee uses statutory authority to transfer assets from one trust to a new trust with different terms, effectively modifying benefits or trustee powers without court involvement. California law allows decanting under certain conditions, depending on the trust terms and powers granted to the trustee. When decanting is not available or when parties dispute its propriety, a trust modification petition may be required to secure court approval or to resolve disagreements about the trust’s administration.
When a trust requires change, individuals can consider several paths: informal amendment by the settlor, trustee-initiated decanting, nonjudicial settlement agreements among beneficiaries, or a formal trust modification petition filed with the probate court. Informal options are typically faster and less costly but require agreement or authority under the trust document. Judicial petitions provide legal finality and are appropriate when disputes exist or statutory requirements prevent informal change. Selecting the right path depends on whether the settlor can act, whether beneficiaries agree, and the nature of the requested change.
If the settlor is alive, has capacity, and the trust’s amendment provisions allow direct revision, a simple amendment or restatement can avoid the expense and delay of court intervention. This path preserves flexibility, maintains privacy, and can quickly implement updated distributions, trustee appointments, or administrative powers. It is important for the settlor to follow the trust’s formal amendment requirements, which often include written amendments signed in the manner required by the trust and applicable state law, to ensure the changes are legally effective and defensible against future challenges.
When all beneficiaries and the trustee agree, a nonjudicial settlement agreement can address many trust issues without court filing. Such agreements can resolve ambiguities, update distribution provisions, or clarify trustee powers so long as they do not contravene the settlor’s material intent or statutory prohibitions. Nonjudicial resolutions conserve resources and maintain confidentiality, but they require full participation and informed consent from interested parties. In situations with discord or absent parties, a petition may still be necessary to achieve a binding resolution.
A formal petition is often necessary when beneficiaries disagree about proposed changes or when the trust lacks express authority for nonjudicial modification. Courts can resolve disputes, interpret ambiguous provisions, and make binding determinations about trustee powers and beneficiary rights. Filing a petition provides procedural protections such as notice and an evidentiary record, ensuring that contested issues are decided under applicable legal standards. This process helps prevent ongoing conflict by producing a court order that clarifies the trust’s terms and administration going forward.
Trusts are drafted based on circumstances at the time of creation; subsequent life events, drafting errors, or asset funding problems can undermine the trust’s operation. In these situations, a petition can address funding mistakes, fix drafting errors through reformation, or allow the court to interpret language that otherwise prevents administration. A judicial solution is sometimes the most reliable path to ensure the trust functions as intended and that beneficiaries receive the distributions the settlor envisioned, particularly when informal remedies are unavailable or contested.
Pursuing a petition for trust modification provides legal clarity and formalizes changes so trustees and beneficiaries have a definitive roadmap for administration. A well-documented judicial order reduces the likelihood of future disputes and offers enforceable guidance for trustees carrying out their duties. Legal proceedings create a factual record and afford interested parties the opportunity to be heard, which can be particularly valuable when competing claims or ambiguities exist. While court involvement can require time and expense, the resulting certainty often outweighs ongoing disagreements or administration problems.
A comprehensive approach also allows the court to resolve ancillary issues that affect the trust’s practical operation, such as asset titling disputes, trustee removal, or allocation of tax responsibilities. By addressing multiple interrelated problems in a single proceeding, parties can achieve a cohesive solution rather than piecemeal fixes that leave ambiguity. The process supports orderly administration and can help preserve family relationships by providing a neutral forum for resolving sensitive disagreements tied to the trust’s terms and distributions.
A court order approving a trust modification clarifies rights, duties, and distributions so trustees can act with confidence and beneficiaries know what to expect. This reduces the risk of repeated litigation or conflicting interpretations that hamper administration. When trustees face uncertainty about carrying out provisions or handling contested assets, judicial resolution provides authoritative guidance. That certainty often prevents future disputes and protects fiduciaries from claims arising from contested decisions, supporting consistent and lawful administration of the trust assets.
Trust modification petitions frequently address funding errors, such as assets left in a decedent’s name or accounts incorrectly designated, by asking the court to treat those assets as trust property. Resolving such issues within a single proceeding ensures that distributions occur as intended and prevents post-distribution challenges. A judicial resolution can streamline administration, allow for correction of practical defects, and provide a clear path to complete the settlor’s estate plan, ensuring beneficiaries receive the benefits intended by the trust document.
Before pursuing any formal action, gather and review all estate planning documents, including the revocable living trust, pour-over will, certification of trust, and any prior amendments. Confirm which assets are titled to the trust and locate account statements and deeds. A careful review often reveals whether nonjudicial remedies are feasible or whether a petition is necessary to correct funding mistakes or ambiguities. Early document review informs strategy, helps identify interested persons who must receive notice, and prepares you for potential discovery and evidentiary requirements in court.
Successful petitions rely on factual evidence demonstrating why the proposed modification aligns with the settlor’s intent or corrects an acknowledged error. Collect drafts, emails, witness statements, financial records, and any documents that shed light on the settlor’s wishes and the circumstances leading to the requested change. Detailed records strengthen the petition, assist with discovery responses, and expedite resolution by clarifying disputed facts for the court. Careful preparation also helps identify potential defenses and structure a persuasive legal argument.
Consider filing a trust modification petition when the trust document contains ambiguities, when there are clear drafting mistakes that alter the settlor’s intent, or when beneficiaries and trustees cannot agree on necessary changes. Other common reasons include trustee misconduct or incapacity, unanticipated tax consequences that undermine the plan, or the discovery that assets have not been funded into the trust. A petition provides a judicial path to resolve these issues and restore the trust’s effective operation to reflect the settlor’s objectives.
You should also consider a petition when informal solutions are impractical due to absentee beneficiaries, uncooperative parties, or legal constraints in the trust document that prevent nonjudicial modification. The petition route gives the court authority to interpret the trust, approve necessary changes, and issue orders that govern administration. This formal resolution supports stable long-term management of trust assets and reduces the chance of future litigation by creating a clear, enforceable record of the court-approved modifications.
Typical circumstances prompting petitions include changed family circumstances such as divorce or remarriage, additions or removals of beneficiaries, the settlor’s incapacity affecting amendment ability, errors in the original drafting, and asset funding omissions. Other triggers are disputes over trustee powers, questions about trust interpretation, or complex tax issues requiring court-approved changes. Recognizing these circumstances early and seeking guidance helps determine whether a petition, reformation, or nonjudicial approach best resolves the issue while preserving the settlor’s intent.
Significant family events or shifting financial realities often make existing trust provisions impractical or unfair. Events such as divorce, birth of new heirs, changes in beneficiary relationships, or major shifts in asset composition can trigger the need for modification. When the settlor cannot personally amend the trust, or when beneficiaries dispute appropriate changes, a petition helps the court evaluate the best way to update the trust to reflect current circumstances while honoring the original purpose of the plan.
Drafting errors, ambiguous language, or inconsistent provisions can create confusion about trustee duties or beneficiary entitlements. When such mistakes are discovered, a petition for reformation or modification asks the court to clarify or correct the document to align with the settlor’s intended outcome. Supporting evidence like prior drafts, correspondence, or testimony about the settlor’s intent can be pivotal. Correcting these errors via a judicial order prevents ongoing disputes and enables proper trust administration in line with the settlor’s goals.
Assets that were meant to be held in trust but remain titled to the settlor or another entity can jeopardize the trust’s distribution plan. Heggstad petitions and related proceedings address such funding problems by asking the court to treat the assets as trust property for administration and distribution. Resolving titling mistakes through the court ensures beneficiaries receive intended distributions and allows trustees to manage the estate without uncertainty or competing claims to improperly titled assets.
The Law Offices of Robert P. Bergman is available to assist clients in Boyes Hot Springs, Sonoma County, and surrounding areas with trust modification petitions and related estate planning needs. We provide individualized attention to review trust documents, assess funding status, identify legal remedies, and pursue the appropriate course—whether that is negotiation, reformation, Heggstad relief, or a formal court petition. Clients receive clear explanations of likely steps, timelines, and considerations so they can make informed decisions about protecting trust assets and beneficiaries’ interests.
Our firm combines experience in estate planning and probate litigation to handle both amicable modifications and contested petitions. We prioritize careful document analysis, strategic case preparation, and practical solutions tailored to each family’s circumstances. From assessing whether nonjudicial options are viable to representing clients in court, we provide focused advocacy and steady guidance at each stage of the process. We aim to reduce conflict where possible while asserting clients’ rights when litigation becomes necessary.
We guide clients through procedural requirements such as notice to interested persons, preparation of declarations and exhibits, and managing discovery and hearings when needed. Our approach balances thorough legal preparation with attention to client concerns about cost, timing, and family dynamics. When litigation is required, we present evidence and argument clearly and persuasively to help courts reach determinations that reflect the settlor’s intent and the law’s requirements for modification or reformation.
Clients benefit from our responsiveness and commitment to communication, including plain-language explanations of options and likely outcomes. We also coordinate with financial advisors, accountants, and real estate professionals to address practical issues like asset retitling, tax implications, and administrative tasks that accompany trust modifications. This collaborative approach helps ensure that any approved modification can be implemented smoothly and that the trust continues to operate effectively for the benefit of its beneficiaries.
Our process begins with a thorough intake and document review to determine the trust’s terms, funding status, and possible remedies. We then advise whether negotiation, decanting, reformation, Heggstad relief, or a court petition is the most appropriate strategy. When a petition is pursued, we prepare the necessary pleadings, coordinate service and notice to interested parties, gather supporting evidence, and represent clients at hearings. Throughout the matter we prioritize transparency about timing and costs while striving to achieve durable, legally sound resolutions.
During the initial evaluation we collect all relevant estate documents, review asset titles, and interview interested parties to understand factual backgrounds and goals. This phase includes identifying potential procedural obstacles, such as unlocatable beneficiaries or conflicts that may require comprehensive notice. Based on this assessment we outline likely legal theories, evidence needed to support a petition, and alternative paths if nonjudicial remedies are feasible. Clear document preparation at this stage strengthens any later petition and reduces surprises during litigation.
A thorough inventory of trust documents and associated asset records is essential to prepare a persuasive petition. We collect the trust instrument, amendments, certificates of trust, deeds, account statements, and any communications that illuminate the settlor’s intent. Proper organization of these materials enables us to identify drafting inconsistencies, funding errors, and documentary evidence that supports reformation or modification. Early attention to documentation helps streamline the petition and increases the chances of a favorable resolution.
Identifying all interested parties and ensuring proper notice is a procedural cornerstone of trust petitions. We determine who must be served, including trustees, beneficiaries, potential creditors, and other persons with a legal interest. Proper notice preserves parties’ rights to participate and avoids later challenges to the petition’s validity. When parties cannot be located, we evaluate appropriate alternative notice techniques recognized by California probate procedures to ensure the court can proceed without procedural defects.
Once documents and notices are in order, we file the petition and serve interested persons according to statutory requirements. If the matter is contested, discovery may follow to obtain evidence such as witness statements, financial records, and drafts of the trust. We advocate for efficient, targeted discovery to develop the facts that support the requested modification while seeking to limit unnecessary expense and delay. Clear evidence and focused discovery often narrow issues and increase the likelihood of negotiated resolution or a streamlined hearing.
Petitions are supported by declarations from witnesses, documentary exhibits, and legal briefs that explain how the requested modification aligns with the trust’s purpose and California law. We carefully draft declarations to present credible, admissible evidence and assemble exhibits that demonstrate both the settlor’s intent and any mistakes or ambiguous language. Persuasive legal briefing connects the facts to statutory and case law principles, helping the court reach a reasoned decision on the requested relief.
When objections arise, we address them through responsive pleadings, discovery responses, and negotiation aimed at narrowing disputes. Settlement discussions may resolve matters without a contested hearing, particularly when parties prioritize a prompt, confidential outcome. If settlement attempts fail, we prepare for hearing by refining evidence and anticipating opposing arguments. Even in contested scenarios, effective negotiation and clear presentation of facts can lead to compromises that preserve time and resources for all parties involved.
At hearing, the court evaluates the evidence, hears argument, and decides whether to grant the requested modification or alternative relief. If the court approves changes, it issues an order that becomes part of the trust’s enforceable record. After obtaining an order, we assist with implementation tasks such as retitling assets, updating trust records, and coordinating distributions consistent with the court’s directives. Post-order steps ensure that the approved modification is carried out efficiently and that administration proceeds according to the court’s instructions.
During the hearing we present witness testimony, documentary evidence, and legal argument structured to demonstrate why the requested modification is appropriate under the circumstances. Clear organization and concise presentation help the court understand the factual background and the legal basis for relief. We prepare witnesses and exhibits in advance to ensure a focused hearing that allows the court to resolve disputed issues and reach a decision based on a solid evidentiary record.
After the court issues an order, practical follow-up tasks include retitling property, updating account beneficiaries, and recording instruments as necessary to reflect the modified trust terms. We coordinate with banks, title companies, and financial institutions to ensure assets are properly administered under the new directives. Where required, we assist with filings and notifications that finalize the administration, helping trustees carry out duties in conformity with the court’s order and the revised trust provisions.
A trust modification petition is a formal request filed with the probate court asking for judicial approval to change specific terms of an existing trust. Petitioners seek this remedy when the settlor cannot amend the trust directly, when beneficiaries disagree, or when statutory or procedural obstacles preclude nonjudicial alternatives. The petition outlines the proposed changes, the factual basis for modification, and legal authority supporting the requested relief. Courts evaluate whether the modification aligns with the settlor’s probable intent and complies with applicable law. This remedy is appropriate when informal measures such as amendments by the settlor or nonjudicial settlement agreements are unavailable or ineffective. Examples include correcting drafting errors, resolving ambiguities, addressing funding mistakes, or removing a trustee when significant concerns exist. The court process provides binding authority that clarifies rights and duties and supports stable trust administration going forward.
The timeline for a trust modification petition varies depending on case complexity, whether the matter is contested, and court scheduling. Uncontested petitions with clear supporting evidence can be resolved in a matter of months, while contested cases involving discovery, multiple hearings, or complex factual disputes may take significantly longer. Court calendars, the need for additional briefing, and the number of interested parties all affect the overall timeline. Early preparation, clear evidence, and efforts to narrow issues through negotiation can shorten the process. Efficient case management and focused discovery also help. That said, parties should plan for potential delays and consider interim steps to protect assets and maintain orderly administration while the petition proceeds through the court system.
Yes. If the settlor is alive and has the capacity to act, the settlor may amend or restate the trust directly according to its amendment provisions, avoiding the need for court involvement. These changes should be executed in the manner required by the trust and California law to ensure they are valid. Nonjudicial changes preserve privacy and are typically faster and less costly than litigation. When the settlor is unable to act, when beneficiaries disagree, or when the trust lacks authority for nonjudicial modification, alternative methods such as trustee-initiated decanting or a nonjudicial settlement agreement may be considered. If those options are unavailable or contested, a trust modification petition becomes necessary to obtain binding judicial approval.
Evidence supporting reformation usually demonstrates that a drafting error or mistake caused the written trust terms to diverge from the settlor’s actual intent. Useful evidence includes earlier drafts of the trust, correspondence, emails, witness testimony, and any documents reflecting the settlor’s discussions about estate planning. The more direct and contemporaneous the evidence of intent, the stronger the case for reformation. Courts assess the quality and credibility of evidence to determine whether reformation is appropriate. Declarations from individuals with direct knowledge of the settlor’s intent and documentary proof that corroborate oral statements are particularly persuasive. Evidence should be organized and presented clearly to aid the court’s evaluation of the contested language or drafting error.
A Heggstad petition asks the court to determine whether property that was intended to be part of a trust but remains titled outside the trust should nonetheless be administered as trust property. This petition is useful when assets were not properly transferred into the trust, such as bank accounts or real property still in the settlor’s individual name, and the parties seek a judicial declaration that those assets are trust assets for distribution purposes. Heggstad proceedings often arise alongside trust modification matters because funding mistakes can affect the trust’s distributions and administration. Resolving titling and funding issues through the court helps ensure that the trust’s terms are carried out as intended and prevents competing claims to assets that were meant to be included in the trust.
Filing a petition typically creates a public court record, and many documents filed in probate proceedings are accessible to interested persons and, in many cases, the public. This contrasts with private, nonjudicial solutions that can preserve confidentiality. Parties concerned about privacy should discuss with counsel whether certain filings can be limited or whether confidentiality measures are appropriate under the circumstances. Although court involvement can reduce privacy, it also provides binding resolution and clear enforceability, which may be preferable when disputes exist or when the legal status of assets is unclear. Counsel can advise about the trade-offs between public resolution and private settlement based on your priorities and the matter’s sensitivity.
Nonjudicial options for resolving trust disputes include negotiation among beneficiaries, mediated settlements, nonjudicial settlement agreements, and trustee-initiated actions such as decanting when authorized by the trust. These approaches can be efficient, confidential, and cost-effective when parties are willing to cooperate and the trust document permits such remedies. Mediation often helps narrow issues and reach compromises without a contested court hearing. However, nonjudicial options require appropriate authority or unanimous agreement among interested persons. When these conditions are not met or when parties are adversarial, a formal petition may be necessary to achieve a binding resolution. Counsel can evaluate whether a nonjudicial path is viable and assist with drafting enforceable settlement agreements if parties reach accord.
Yes. A petition can request removal of a trustee when there are valid grounds, such as failure to perform duties, conflicts of interest, incapacity, or other conduct that impairs proper administration. Petitioners must present evidence supporting removal and propose an appropriate successor or ask the court to appoint a new fiduciary. The court weighs the trustee’s conduct against statutory standards and the best interests of the beneficiaries when considering removal. Removal proceedings can be contentious and often involve discovery into trustee actions and decision-making. Courts prefer solutions that protect trust administration and beneficiaries’ interests, so petitions may include requests for accounting, surcharge, or other remedies in addition to removal when trustee misconduct has caused harm to trust property or beneficiaries’ rights.
California probate rules require notice to interested persons when a petition affecting a trust is filed. Notice obligations typically include serving trustees, beneficiaries, and others with a legal interest in the trust so they have an opportunity to participate in the proceeding. Proper service preserves due process rights and prevents later challenges to the court’s jurisdiction or the petition’s validity. When parties cannot be located through reasonable diligence, courts may permit alternative forms of notice such as substituted service or publication. Counsel will evaluate who qualifies as an interested person and will take appropriate steps to provide required notice to protect the court’s authority to decide the matter and to allow all affected parties to present their positions.
Costs for filing a trust modification petition vary based on complexity, whether the matter is contested, and the extent of discovery and hearings required. Uncontested matters generally incur lower fees for preparation and filing, while contested cases involving multiple parties, depositions, and lengthy hearings will result in higher legal costs and court expenses. Filing fees and costs for service, subpoenas, and expert reports, if needed, also affect total expenses. Counsel can provide an initial estimate after reviewing the case and identifying likely issues. In many matters, strategic negotiation and focused litigation can control costs. We discuss fee structures, anticipated expenses, and steps to limit unnecessary costs while pursuing the most appropriate resolution for the client’s objectives.
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