Motion to Disqualify or in the alternative, appoint independent counsel
25PR003598: CONSERVATORSHIP OF: RONALD L ZIGLER 05/20/2026 Hearing on Motion - Other Motion to Disqualify in Department 129
Tentative Ruling
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO DISQUALIFY OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, APPOINT INDEPENDENT COUNSEL PURSUANT TO PROBATE CODE § 1470 AND 1471
Filed: 2/4/2026
Re: Conservatorship of: Ronald L Zigler, 25PR003598
Moving Party: Rochanda Zigler, Petitioner In Pro Per
Responding Party: Proposed Conservatee Ronald Zigler Attorney: Randall Shrout, (916) 937-8322
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 courts website. If the party does not have online access, they may call the dedicated phone number for the Probate Department at (916) 875-2529 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 129 Zoom Link is https://saccourt-cagov.zoomgov.com/my/sscdept129 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
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?”
25PR003598: CONSERVATORSHIP OF: RONALD L ZIGLER 05/20/2026 Hearing on Motion - Other Motion to Disqualify in Department 129
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 Courts 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 Reporters Office and an official reporter will be provided.
TENTATIVE RULING Petitioner and Movant Rochanda Ziglers motion to disqualify is DENIED as follows.
Petitioner is the daughter of Ronald Zigler and has raised concerns relating to Mr. Ziglers care and the power of attorney he executed, naming Libra Moses-Holland as his attorney-in-fact.
Petitioner states Ronald Zigler does not have independent counsel and that the issue relates to the structural independence of legal representation as required under Probate Code section 1471(d). (Petitioners Memorandum of Points and Authorities [MPA], 3:7.)
Petitioner references Probate Codes 1470 and 1471, as well as Code of Civil Procedure section 128 in support of her motion. Citing to People ex. rel. Dept. of Corporations v. SpeeDee Oil Change Systems, Inc. (1990) 20 Cal.4th 1135, Petitioner argues that disqualification of counsel is necessary to preserve integrity and fairness. (MPA, 3:20-22.) This case, however, involves attorneys in the same firm who represent adverse parties in the same litigation. (People ex. rel. Dept. of Corporations v. SpeeDee Oil Change Systems, Inc. (1990) 20 Cal.4th 1135, 1139.)
Probate Code section 1470 is a discretionary statute permitting a court to appoint private legal counsel if the court determines the person is not otherwise represented by legal counsel and appointment would be helpful to the resolution of the matter or is necessary to protect the persons interests. (Prob. Code, § 1470(a).) Additionally, Probate Code section 1471 mandates the appointment of counsel where a proposed conservatee, conservatee, or person lacking capacity is not represented by counsel and does not plan to retain counsel. (Prob. Code, § 1471.)
Petitioner identifies three issues stemming from this purported lack of structural independence: Mr. Zigler (1) cannot review pleadings independently; (2) cannot communicate freely with counsel without assistance; and (3) his access to information is necessarily controlled by the [Power of Attorney] and caregiver. (MPA, 4:6-8.) According to Petitioner, these circumstances render Mr. Ziglers counsel to be functionally advising and protecting third parties. (MPA, 4:8- 9.) Petitioner does not explain how Mr. Ziglers reliance on others constitutes misconduct or
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO
25PR003598: CONSERVATORSHIP OF: RONALD L ZIGLER 05/20/2026 Hearing on Motion - Other Motion to Disqualify in Department 129
breach of duty by his counsel. Additionally, Petitioner does not explain how the appointment of new, independent counsel would remedy the issue of structural independence if Mr. Ziglers reliance on his attorney-in-fact and caregiver for assistance persists.
Mr. Zigler is represented by legal counsel and expressly states his wishes to continue with his current counsel. (Declaration of Ronald Zigler, ¶ 7.) Because Mr. Zigler is represented by counsel, the court cannot make a determination that he is without counsel for purposes of Probate Code section 1470 or 1471. Relief on these grounds cannot be granted. Further, Petitioner has not identified a basis to presume counsel has violated his duties to Mr. Zigler. (People ex. rel. Dept. of Corporations v. SpeeDee Oil Change Systems, Inc. (1990) 20 Cal.4th 1135, 1144.) In light of Mr. Ziglers express wishes and in light of Petitioners speculatory concerns for the independence of Mr. Ziglers counsel, the Court, in its discretion, does not find that appointment would be helpful to the resolution of this case or necessary to protect Mr. Ziglers interests.
The motion to disqualify is DENIED.
This minute order is effective immediately. No formal order or other notice is required. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1019.5; CRC, Rule 3.1312.)