DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
26PG-0033402·shasta·Probate·Probate
Hearing 1 day agoCONTINUED

GUARDIANSHIP OF KOLTON LIPSKI

Petition for Appointment of Guardian; Petition for Appointment of Co-Guardian

Hearing date
Aug 17, 2026
Department
42
Judge
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
Sep 21, 2026
Appearance
Not required

Motion type

Browse all Petition rulings statewide →

Parties

PetitionerTera Hughes
PetitionerDeborah Duccini

Attorneys

Tescherfor Minor

Ruling

CASE NUMBER: 26PG-0033402 Disclosure Re: guardianship cases involving Shasta County Health and Human Services Agency-Judge Wood discloses that her step-daughter, Erinn Watts, is the Administrative Branch Director of the Health and Human Services Agency. In that position, Judge Wood’s step-daughter does not have any involvement in the investigation, management, prosecution or defense of guardianship cases. However, the Court makes this disclosure of an employment relationship between an investigating agency and the Court’s first degree relative as required by California Code of Judicial Ethics.

This matter is on calendar for further proceedings on a Petition for Appointment of Guardian of the Person filed by the minor’s aunt, Tera Hughes, and a Petition for Appointment of a Co- Guardian of the Person filed by the minor’s grandmother, Deborah Duccini. Letters of Temporary Guardianship were issued to Tera Hughes on May 22, 2026, and to Deborah Duccini as Co-Guardian on June 15, 2026, and are set to expire today unless further extended.

Hughes Petition. Based on the declaration filed on August 11, 2026, the Court dispenses with notice to the father. A new Notice of Hearing has not been filed and served for today’s date. There is no proof of service of the Notice of Hearing and Petition for the maternal grandfather or paternal grandmother and insufficient information has been provided to permit the Court to dispense with notice. The father must be personally served in order to move forward on the Petition. Prob. Code § 1511(b). All other parties may be served by mail. Prob. Code § 1511(c). Alternatively, the above parties can sign a consent and waiver of notice (GC-211, section 4), in lieu of being served.

Duccini Petition. The mother and maternal grandfather have consented to the guardianship and waived notice. The Court dispenses with notice to the father. Proof of service has been filed for the paternal grandmother. The matter has been properly noticed. Tera Hughes previously filed an objection.

The Court has reviewed the Court Investigator’s report filed on June 25, 2026, which recommends granting both Petitions. The court notes that there was no joint petition to be appointed coguardians, and the ability of the two co-guardians to act jointly is questionable. Attorney Tescher was previously appointed as counsel for the minor. The Court will inquire whether the child is or may be an Indian child. If Petitioners have reason to know that the child is an Indian child, they must make further inquiry to learn about the child’s Indian heritage.

At the next hearing, the Court intends to move forward on all Petitions that have been properly noticed. This matter is continued to Monday, September 21, 2026, at 8:30 a.m. in Department 42 for further proceedings on both Petitions. The Temporary Guardianship is ORDERED to remain in effect until the continued hearing date. Each Petitioner is required to file and serve a new Notice of Hearing for the continued hearing date, along with a copy of the Petition, on the parties identified above. In the alternative, if Petitioners cannot serve the parties identified, the Court will require a declaration explaining in detail all efforts of Petitioners to locate and serve them and why they cannot be served, to permit the Court to dispense with notice.

Warning: Failure to properly effect service or provide adequate basis to dispense with service as to the necessary parties will result in denial of the Petitions. Notice is preserved. No appearance is necessary on today’s calendar.

GUARDIANSHIP OF MICAH MAHER

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