Petition for Appointment of Successor Guardian of the Persons
CASE NUMBER: CVPG19-0030230 This matter is on calendar for further proceedings on a Petition for Appointment of Successor Guardian of the Persons. The Petition was filed by the minors’ uncle, Ridge Gigax. Letters of
Temporary Guardianship were issued on March 26, 2026, and are set to expire today unless further extended. The current Guardian is Patricia Schoepflin, who has passed away.
A new Notice of Hearing has not been filed for today’s date. There is no proof of service of the Notice of Hearing and Petition for the paternal grandparents of Alden or paternal grandparents of Cian. Insufficient information has been provided to permit the Court to dispense with notice to these parties. These 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.
The Court has reviewed the Court Investigator’s report filed on April 21, 2026, which recommends granting the Petition. The Court will inquire whether the child is or may be an Indian child. If Petitioner has reason to know that the child is an Indian child, they must make further inquiry to learn about the child’s Indian heritage. The mother has filed an objection to the Petition. Additionally, the mother has filed a Petition for Termination of Guardianship currently set for hearing on June 22, 2026.
In light of the objection and Petition for Termination, the Court will appoint the Public Defender as counsel for the minors. The matter is continued to Monday, June 22, 2026, at 8:30 a.m. in Department 42 for further proceedings on the Petition for Appointment of Successor Guardianship of the Persons and confirmation of counsel. The Temporary Guardianship is ORDERED to remain in effect until the continued hearing date. 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 Petitioner cannot serve the parties identified, the Court will require a declaration explaining in detail all efforts of Petitioner 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 Petition. Notice is preserved. No appearance is necessary on today’s calendar.
GUARDIANSHIP OF MARY LEIB
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”