In The Matter of The Bressler Irrevocable Trust
VERIFIED PETITION TO COMPEL TRUST ACCOUNTING; TO COMPEL ACCOUNTING OF ACTS OF ATTORNEY-IN-FACT; FOR BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY AND SURCHARGE; FOR REMOVAL OF TRUSTEE; AND FOR DOUBLE DAMAGES UNDER PROBATE CODE § 859
Motion type
Causes of action
Parties
Ruling
1204-05.) Applicant failed to provide adequate notice of the hearing date. (See Code Civ. Proc. §§1005, subd. (b) and 1010.6, subd. (a)(3)(B).) The proof of service indicates that notice and the moving documents were mailed on July 30, 2026. However, July 22, 2026, was the last day to timely serve notice by mail of the August 18, 2026, hearing.
In The Matter of The Bressler Irrevocable Trust 26PR000097
VERIFIED PETITION TO COMPEL TRUST ACCOUNTING; TO COMPEL ACCOUNTING OF ACTS OF ATTORNEY-IN-FACT; FOR BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY AND SURCHARGE; FOR REMOVAL OF TRUSTEE; AND FOR DOUBLE DAMAGES UNDER PROBATE CODE § 859
APPEARANCE REQUIRED for case management hearing.
CIVIL LAW & MOTION CALENDAR – Hon. Cynthia P. Smith, Dept. A (Historic Courthouse) at 8:30 a.m.
Marylouise Avist v. Nathan Fite et al 25CV000794
MOTION FOR LEAVE OF COURT TO FILE A SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
TENTATIVE RULING: The Court appoints Daniel DeWeese as Special Administrator of the Estate of Marylouise Avist, exclusively for purposes of prosecuting the instant action, and in that capacity orders that he be substituted in as Plaintiff of record in this action.
The Motion is GRANTED IN PART. The request to deem the Second Amended Complaint filed is DENIED. Mr. DeWeese is GRANTED 10 Court days’ leave to file a Second Amended Complaint in substantially the same form as that attached as Exhibit 6 to the Declaration of Matthew Russell filed May 28, 2026.
The moving party failed to include in the notice of this motion proper notice of the Court’s tentative ruling system as required by Local Rule 2.9. Moving party is directed to immediately provide, by telephone call AND email, the missing notice to opposing party/ies forthwith. The requirements for requesting oral argument under Local Rule 2.9 remain in effect. However, the Court may grant belated requests for oral argument or continuance of hearing, made by any party who represents it did not timely receive the required notice, regardless of whether or not moving party is present at the hearing.
A. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On April 15, 2025, Marylouise Avist commenced the instant action by filing a complaint asserting claims sounding in negligence and premises liability against the defendants. On April 23, 2025, Ms. Avist filed a First Amended Complaint (FAC). On April 10, 2026, Ms. Avist filed a Motion for Leave to File a Second Amended Complaint (April 10 Motion re: SAC), and set
2
Cited authorities
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?”