Motion to Quash Third-Party Subpoenas for Production of Business Records and for Monetary Sanctions of $4,900; Motion to Quash or in the alternative for Protective Order
25PR001968: IN RE: THE DEAN KINGWELL SMITH AND LOIS JEAN SMITH FAMILY TRUST 1995 06/17/2026 Hearing on Motion - Other Motion to Quash in Department 129
Tentative Ruling
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO QUASH THIRD-PARTY SUBPOENAS FOR PRODUCTION OF BUSINESS RECORDS AND FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS OF $4,900
Filed: 5/22/2026
Re: The Dean Kingwell Smith and Lois Jean Smith Family Trust, Established July 10, 1995
Moving Party: Trustee/Respondent Cynthia Blackson Attorney: Howard Garfield, (530) 325-4852
Responding Party: Petitioner/Beneficiary Karin Kister Attorney: Anupe Litt, (916) 404-6620
NOTICE: Pursuant to Local Rule 1.06 (A), the court will make a tentative ruling on the merits of this matter by 2:00 p.m., the court day before the hearing. The complete text of the tentative ruling may be downloaded off the courts website. If the party does not have online access, they may call the dedicated phone number for the Probate Department at (916) 875-2529 between the hours of 2:00 p.m. and 4:00 p.m. on the court day before the hearing and receive the tentative ruling. If you do not call the court and the opposing party by 4:00 p.m. the court day before the hearing, no hearing will be held.
Unless ordered to appear in person by the Court, parties may appear remotely either telephonically or by video conference via the Zoom video/audio conference platform with notice to the Court and all other parties in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure § 367.75. Although remote participation is not required, the Court will presume all parties are appearing remotely for non-evidentiary civil hearings. The Department 129 Zoom Link is https://saccourt-cagov.zoomgov.com/my/sscdept129 and the Zoom Meeting ID is 161 3352 9231. To appear on Zoom telephonically, call (833) 568-8864 and enter the Zoom Meeting ID referenced above. NO COURTCALL APPEARANCES WILL BE ACCEPTED.
Parties requesting services of a court reporter will need to arrange for private court reporter services at their own expense, pursuant to Government Code § 68086 and California Rules of Court, Rule 2.956. Requirements for requesting a court reporter are listed in the Policy for Official Reporter Pro Tempore available on the Sacramento Superior Court website at https://www.saccourt.ca.gov/court-reporters/docs/crtrp-6a.pdf. Parties may contact Court- Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore by utilizing the list of Court Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore available at https://www.saccourt.ca.gov/court-reporters/docs/crtrp-
25PR001968: IN RE: THE DEAN KINGWELL SMITH AND LOIS JEAN SMITH FAMILY TRUST 1995 06/17/2026 Hearing on Motion - Other Motion to Quash in Department 129
13.pdf.
A Stipulation and Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (CV/E-206) is required to be signed by each party, the private court reporter, and the Judge prior to the hearing, if not using a reporter from the Courts Approved Official Reporter Pro Tempore list.
Once the form is signed it must be filed with the clerk. If a litigant has been granted a fee waiver and requests a court reporter, the party must submit a Request for Court Reporter by a Party with a Fee Waiver (CV/E-211) and it must be filed with the clerk at least 10 days prior to the hearing or at the time the proceeding is scheduled if less than 10 days away. Once approved, the clerk will forward the form to the Court Reporters Office and an official reporter will be provided.
TENTATIVE RULING Trustee Cynthia Blacksons (Trustee) hearing on the motion to quash or in the alternative for protective order is DROPPED from the calendar. Trustee filed an amended notice for the motion, which was heard concurrently with this hearing. Thus, the hearing is dropped as duplicative.
This minute order is effective immediately. No formal order or other notice is required. (Code Civ. Proc. §1019.5; CRC, Rule 3.1312.)
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”