DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
202000545359PRTR·ventura·Probate·Trust Administration
Hearing 3 months agoThe Court will consider setting an OSC re Surcharge against Petitioner Amy Wissmann; Court approves trustee’s attorney fees in the amount of $10,376.50; Bond is to be reduced to $282,000.

In Re Amanda Wissman 2018 Special Needs Trust

Account and Report 4th Account & Report

Hearing date
May 26, 2026
Department
J6
Judge
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Petition rulings statewide →

Monetary amounts referenced

$362,885.03$147,351.56$73,675.78/year$26,923.56$13,461.78/year$242,457.03$6,748.12$8,059.94$10,734.82$14,711.34$24,439.63$2,305$10,376.50$282,000

Parties

PetitionerAmy Wissmann
OtherAmanda Wissman 2018 Special Needs Trust

Ruling

202000545359PRTR: In Re Amanda Wissman 2018 Special Needs Trust 05/26/2026 in Department J6 Account and Report 4th Account & Report for the period of 11/07/23 through 11/06/25

The estate value at the beginning of this fourth account was $362,885.03. Petitioner spent $147,351.56 over this account period, or an average of $73,675.78/year. The SNT received just $26,923.56 in income over the same period, or an average of $13,461.78/year. The ending balance is $242,457.03. This means that Petitioner spent down the SNT value by over 33% in this period.

The disbursements included entertainment & recreation expenses totaling $6,748.12. An additional $8,059.94 was paid to Frontier Communications. Housekeeping and landscaping costs totaled $10,734.82. Household supplies totaled $14,711.34. “Health and Beauty Expenses” totaled $24,439.63, consisting mostly of massages, plus another $2,305 in massage expenses at a private country club.

Petitioner states: “[b]ecause of the significant assets of Petitioner’s family,” if the Trust should be depleted in the future, the beneficiary’s family will continue to cover those expenses for her, as they did prior to establishment of the SNT. This type of bare assertion is not something the Court may reasonably rely upon to approve the trustee’s profligate spending. The trustee has a current duty to act in the beneficiary’s best interest, which includes managing the trust estate in a financially prudent manner.

The Court questions why, if the family is willing and able to support the beneficiary, the family did not pay for the beneficiary’s current discretionary expenses rather than the SNT. This would ensure that the beneficiary’s own limited resources are preserved for the future, when the family cannot, even if they wish to, support the beneficiary. Instead, the only certainty before the Court appears to be the rapid depletion of the beneficiary’s limited resources by the trustee’s actions.

The Court will consider setting an OSC re Surcharge against Petitioner Amy Wissmann regarding the disbursements made during this account and her handling of the trust corpus. Discuss.

The Court will approve trustee’s attorney fees in the amount of $10,376.50.

Bond is to be reduced to $282,000.

1

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