MOTION TO COMPEL PROOF OF RESIDENTIAL ADDRESSES
service filed with this motion only shows that the notice of motion was served.
Counsel has also not complied with Orange County Local Rule 601.21, which provides as follows: “If an attorney wishes to withdraw from a probate proceeding as attorney of record for the estate representative or any other fiduciary, in addition to the requirements under CCP 284 and CRC 3.1362, the attorney must have a citation issued and served on such motion or petition directing the representative to appear before the court to show cause why the motion or petition should not be granted or why the representative has not taken the steps to complete his or her duties.”
The client is the Administrator of the Estate of Mary Alice Althoff, and the court’s records do not reflect that a citation was issued to the client. Counsel must file a Citation – Probate (DE-122/GC-322). Once the citation is signed by the court, counsel must have it served on the client in the same manner as a summons. (See Code Civ. Proc. § 415.10.)
If the client appears at the hearing, the motion may be granted. Otherwise, the motion will be continued once for compliance with the foregoing.
00993898 Kim – Probate TENTATIVE RULING
Case: Kim – Probate 00993898
Calendar No: 7 Date: 07/29/26
MOTION TO COMPEL PROOF OF RESIDENTIAL ADDRESSES (ROA 750)
Kyu Tai Kim, in propria persona, filed a motion for an order “compelling Young S. Kwon and/or any interested party who has submitted filings using a California residential address to produce verified proof of current address.”
The motion is DENIED.
Mr. Kim cites no authority for his requested order.
The court’s records reflect that the only case participants in this probate action are Mr. Kim and Young S. Kwon. To obtain information from Mr. Kwon, Mr. Kim may propound discovery.
Mr. Kwon is ordered to give notice of this ruling. [Motion Type]
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?”