DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CVPB12-0027186·shasta·Probate·Trust
Hearing about 2 months agoCONTINUED

In re the Ashley Stites Irrevocable Special Needs Trust

Petition for Order Authorizing Release of Blocked Funds and Purchase of Real Property

Hearing date
Jul 13, 2026
Department
44
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
Aug 10, 2026
Appearance
Not required

Motion type

Browse all Petition rulings statewide →

Parties

OtherAshley Stites

Ruling

CASE NUMBER: CVPB12-0027186 This matter is on calendar for further proceedings on a Petition for Order Authorizing Release of Blocked Funds and Purchase of Real Property. A new Notice of Hearing has not been filed and served for today’s date. A supplemental declaration has not been filed to address the issues raised on June 22, 2026. The Petition requests to withdraw a sum that would significantly deplete the subject blocked account, which is a main asset of the trust. No information has been provided to permit the Court to determine if the remaining assets of the trust will be sufficient to provide ongoing maintenance of the real property and accomplish the purpose of the trust.

The matter is continued to Monday, August 10, 2026, at 2:30 p.m. in Department 44 for further proceedings on the Petition for Order Authorizing Release of Blocked Funds and Purchase of Real Property. A supplemental declaration is required to be filed to address the issues raised above. Petitioner is required to file and serve a new Notice of Hearing for the continued hearing date, along with a copy of the Petition and supplemental declaration, on all parties entitled to notice. No appearance is necessary on today’s calendar.

IN RE: BEEMAN FAMILY 1995 REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…
Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.

Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities

Ask about this ruling

Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”

Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Find similar rulings

Source

Share