In Re: Jean Ann Sindle Revocable Trust

25PR001421: IN RE: JEAN ANN SINDLE REVOCABLE TRUST 09/02/2026 Hearing on Motion - Other Motion for Suspension of Trustee's Powers in Department 126

Tentative Ruling

MOTION FOR: 1. SUSPENSION OF TRUSTEE'S POWERS; 2. CLARIFICATION OF JUNE 11, 2025 ORDER; 3. IN THE ALTERNATIVE, ORDER PRESERVING TRUST ASSETS; AND 4. IN THE ALTERNATIVE, ORDER REQUIRING TRUSTEE TO POST BOND

Filed: 7/29/2026

Re: In Re: Jean Ann Sindle Revocable Trust 25PR001421

Moving Parties: Petitioners Jesse Sindle, Justin Sindle and Tracy Sindle Attorney: Anastasia B. Salmon, (916) 419-2100

Responding Party: Christine Bonanno, Trustee Attorney: Jackie M. Sueyres, (279) 245-5250

NOTICE: Pursuant to Local Rule 1.06 (A), the court will make a tentative ruling on the merits of this matter by 2:00 p.m., the court day before the hearing. The complete text of the tentative ruling may be downloaded off the court’s website. If the party does not have online access, they may call the dedicated phone number for the Probate Department at (916) 875-2526 between the hours of 2:00 p.m. and 4:00 p.m. on the court day before the hearing and receive the tentative ruling. If you do not call the court and the opposing party by 4:00 p.m. the court day before the hearing, no hearing will be held.

Unless ordered to appear in person by the Court, parties may appear remotely either telephonically or by video conference via the Zoom video/audio conference platform with notice to the Court and all other parties in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure § 367.75. Although remote participation is not required, the Court will presume all parties are appearing remotely for non-evidentiary civil hearings. The Department 126 Zoom Link is https://saccourt-cagov.zoomgov.com/my/sscdept126 and the Zoom Meeting ID is 161 3352 9231. To appear on Zoom telephonically, call (833) 568-8864 and enter the Zoom Meeting ID referenced above. NO COURTCALL APPEARANCES WILL BE ACCEPTED.

Parties requesting services of a court reporter will need to arrange for private court reporter services at their own expense, pursuant to Government Code § 68086 and California Rules of Court, Rule 2.956. Requirements for requesting a court reporter are listed in the Policy for Official Reporter Pro Tempore available on the Sacramento Superior Court website at https://www.saccourt.ca.gov/court-reporters/docs/crtrp-6a.pdf. Parties may contact Court- Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore by utilizing the list of Court Approved Official

25PR001421: IN RE: JEAN ANN SINDLE REVOCABLE TRUST 09/02/2026 Hearing on Motion - Other Motion for Suspension of Trustee's Powers in Department 126

Reporters Pro Tempore available at https://www.saccourt.ca.gov/court-reporters/docs/crtrp- 13.pdf.

A Stipulation and Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (CV/E-206) is required to be signed by each party, the private court reporter, and the Judge prior to the hearing, if not using a reporter from the Court’s Approved Official Reporter Pro Tempore list.

Once the form is signed it must be filed with the clerk. If a litigant has been granted a fee waiver and requests a court reporter, the party must submit a Request for Court Reporter by a Party with a Fee Waiver (CV/E-211) and it must be filed with the clerk at least 10 days prior to the hearing or at the time the proceeding is scheduled if less than 10 days away. Once approved, the clerk will forward the form to the Court Reporter’s Office and an official reporter will be provided.

TENTATIVE RULING Petitioners Jesse Sindle, Justin Sindle and Tracy Sindle’s (“Petitioners”) motion is ruled upon as follows.

Petitioners premise their filing on, inter alia, Probate Code sections 15642, subd. (e), and 16420, subd. (a)(2). “A trustee may be removed in accordance with the trust instrument, by the court on its own motion, or on petition of a settlor, cotrustee, or beneficiary under Section 17200.” (Prob. Code, § 15642 (a) [italics added].) “If a trustee commits a breach of trust, or threatens to commit a breach of trust, a beneficiary or cotrustee of the trust may commence a proceeding for” a protective order. (Prob.

Code, § 16420(a)(2) [emphasis added].) Petitioner offers no authority to demonstrate how a motion is the proper procedural vehicle to suspend a trustee. (Prob. Code, § 15642 (a).) “[Probate Code] Section 1000 provides, in relevant part, ‘Except to the extent that [the Probate Code] provides applicable rules, the rules of practice applicable to civil actions . . . apply to, and constitute the rules of practice’ in proceedings under the Probate Code. (§ 1000, subd. (a).)” (Goebner v. Superior Court (2025) 110 Cal.App.5th1105, 1110 [emphasis added].) “This is a rule of default—that is, the Probate Code ‘adopts the civil practice rules only where special rules are not prescribed.’” (Id., citing Merrill v.

Finberg (1992) 4 Cal.App.4th 1443, 1447.) The Probate Code expressly prescribes the procedure to suspend a trustee’s powers. Thus, a motion to suspend a trustee’s powers and/or seek a protective order is procedurally improper. The requests to suspend trustee powers and for protective order are denied.

Next, Petitioners seek clarity regarding the June 11, 2025 minute order expressly stating, “no disbursement from the Trust are allowed.” Petitioners note that disbursements are prohibited, yet Trustee’s accounting lists several payments to her counsel under the receipts and disbursements schedule. (Memorandum of Points and Authorities [“MPA”], 8:16-17:1.) The Probate Code does not expressly define “disbursement” for purposes of an accounting. However, the Court necessarily construes “disbursements” to include costs and payments made with trust funds or assets. (Ferrell v. County of San Diego (2001) 90 Cal.App.4th 537, 543, citing Webster’s 3d

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO

25PR001421: IN RE: JEAN ANN SINDLE REVOCABLE TRUST 09/02/2026 Hearing on Motion - Other Motion for Suspension of Trustee's Powers in Department 126

New Internat. Dict. (1981) p. 644 [“The word ‘disbursement’ means funds paid out, and the word ‘disburse’ means to expend or pay out.”]; Allen v. Martin (1859) 34 Ala. 442, 444 [“To disburse money, is to pay it out, not to pay or deliver it to the owner. An agent is said to disburse money, when he pays it out ”].) Thus, Trustee’s argument that the order was silent on whether payments to attorneys were prohibited is unpersuasive. Petitioners correctly point out that despite the Court’s order prohibiting disbursements, Trustee’s accounting explicitly lists several disbursements. Trustee is empowered to seek reimbursement for attorney fees and costs where litigation is necessary for the preservation of the trust. (Whittlesey v. Aiello (2002) 104 Cal.App.4th 1221, 1226.)

Petitioners’ request for a bond is granted. The Court finds upon the facts provided, including disbursements against court order and inaccurate accounting details, that a bond is necessary to protect the interests of the beneficiaries. (Prob. Code, § 15602(a)(2).) Trustee is ordered to obtain bond in the amount of $500,000.00.

The motion is granted in part. Petitioners are directed to file a new proposed order that conforms with this ruling.

Trustee is ordered to obtain bond and file proof of bond no later than October 7, 2026.

This minute order is effective immediately. No formal order or other notice is required. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1019.5; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1312.)