IN THE MATTER OF THE EMIL A. TANAGHO AND MONA F. TANAGHO FAMILY TRUST DATED APRIL 19, 2029
Status Conference
Motion type
Ruling
PLEASE NOTE: Probate cases that are designated as confidential by California law will not be posted online. For tentative rulings in those matters, please contact the judicial secretary at (415) 444- 7260. Page 4 | 7
Judge James T. Chou Department C 10:00 Calendar
PR0000429 IN THE MATTER OF LOIS A. MEREDITH
Status Conference - Filing of Report of Status of Administration or Petition for Final Distribution.
Ruling. Personal representative Bernadette Lorda, and attorney Miranda Dressler are ordered to appear.
PR0001625 IN THE MATTER OF EMIL A. TANAGHO
1. Status Conference - Filing of Report of Status of Administration or Petition for Final Distribution.
2. OSC – Why attorney John Wm. Bryant and Mona F. Tanagho failed to appear on 5/28/26.
Ruling. This matter is continued to September 17, 2026, at 10:00 a.m.
PR0001625 IN THE MATTER OF THE EMIL A. TANAGHO AND MONA F. TANAGHO FAMIL Y TRUST DATED APRIL 19, 2029
Status Conference.
Ruling. This matter is continued to September 17, 2026, at 10:00 a.m.
PR0001409 IN THE MATTER OF KING ARTHUR HARRINGTON, JR.
Status Conference - Filing of Final Inventory and Appraisal
Ruling. Pursuant to the 9/4/26 Status Conference Statement, the status hearing for the filing of the Final Inventory and Appraisal is continued to December 3, 2026, at 10:00 a.m. An appearance will be required on that date if the Final Inventory and Appraisal is not filed at least five court days prior to hearing. (Super. Ct. Marin County, Local Rules, rule 6.2(b), Filing, Hearing, and Continuance Procedures.)
PR0001688 IN THE MATTER OF ANTHONY ROBERT DAWSON
Status Conference - Filing of Final Inventory and Appraisal
Ruling. This matter is ordered off calendar; the Final Inventory and Appraisal has been filed.
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?”