Petition for Internal Affairs
First, you cannot skirt the rules of probate distribution just because the property will eventually be distributed a different way by the trust. [1] Thus, the court must order distribution of whatever property the estate actually holds according to the terms of Decedent's Last Will and Testament, which devises the entire estate to the trust.
Second, the sale of estate property removes that property from the corpus of the estate res, thus making it legally impossible for the Court to order that same property distributed to the heirs or, in this case, the devisee (which is the trust). Thus, this Court cannot make an order for final distribution that transfers title of the subject property to the trust (or its beneficiaries), because the estate no longer holds title to the subject property.
There is also one further issue regarding the conflicting allegations in the petition for final distribution that the real property was sold, but the "the estate has no liquid assets." How is that possible? If the property was sold, the consideration for the property must have been money. Where is the money? If the entirety of the purchase price of the subject property was used to repay the reverse mortgage on the real property, then the outcome of that sale was 1) the subject real property was transferred from the estate to the buyer; and 2) the estate is a no-asset estate not subject to final distribution pursuant to Probate Code section 12251.
Therefore, the Court should grant the petition as to the request to terminate the administration of the estate for no assets on hand, but deny the petition as to the request to confirm sale of the property. If petitioner desires court confirmation of sale, Petitioner must file a proper request using the procedures outlined in the Probate Code at 10300 et seq., and Judicial Council form DE-260. [1] A party cannot avoid probating a deceased person's estate just because the heirs would be the same as those in the deceased person's trust. (Placencia v.
Strazicich (2019) 42 Cal.App.5th 730, 744. ["Accordingly, it would be premature for the court to distribute Ralph's personal estate at this time. (See Estate of Hart (1957) 151 Cal.App.2d 271, 280-281, 311 P.2d 605 [where title vests subject to the administration of the estate, the right to possession is deferred until the distribution of the estate and is contingent upon the will not being set aside by a contest after probate].) This is because title vests at date of death in the person to whom it is devised or inherited. (
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?”
The estate is cast on the heir by operation of law without regard to his wishes or election. No assent or acceptance is necessary. He cannot, by any act, cause the estate to remain in the ancestor, for the latter is incapable of holding it after his death. He cannot, by any renunciation or disclaimer, prevent the passage of title to himself."].) Thus, a party cannot "skip" probate.
Tentative Ruling: Matter of Stornetta Family Trust Tentative Ruling: Matter of Stornetta Family Trust Case Number
Case Type Trust Hearing Date / Time Mon, 06/29/2026 - 08:30 Nature of Proceedings Petition for Internal Affairs Tentative Ruling Probate Notes: Personal Appearances are required.
On January 16, 2026, a Petition for Internal Affairs of a Trust was filed by three alleged beneficiaries.
On April 30, 2026, an Objection to that petition was filed by Craig L. Stornetta. The Objection places this matter at issue, requiring evidentiary hearing to resolve. (In re Estate of Lensch (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 667, 676; Conservatorship of Farrant (2021) 67 Cal.App.5th 370, 377.)