Estate of Osalvo CA1/5

Filed 8/25/25 Estate of Osalvo CA1/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FIVE

Estate of ROSA OSALVO, Deceased.

DEPAK KHIANI, A171903

Petitioner and Appellant, (San Francisco City & County v. Super. Ct. No. PES-23-306853) LAKSHMI KHIANI YABUT et al., Objectors and Respondents.

In this probate proceeding, the decedent’s son Depak Khiani (Son) appeals from the probate court’s order denying his petition for probate of a lost will and his objections to the petition of the decedent’s daughter, Lakshmi Khiani Yabut (Daughter). Son argues the probate court erred in denying his petition and overruling his objections without holding an evidentiary hearing. We affirm. BACKGROUND Rosa Osalvo (Decedent) died in November 2023. She had no surviving spouse; two children, Son and Daughter; and one grandchild, Daughter’s child Jennifer Cayanan (Grandchild). In December 2023, Daughter filed a petition for probate of a 1993 will leaving Decedent’s entire estate to Daughter and Grandchild, and expressly leaving nothing to Son. Son, acting in propria persona, filed a contest and

1

objection, averring that Decedent told him “she had made another a [sic] new will in 2002, revoking her 1993 will” and giving “all of her assets to me and [Daughter] in equal shares.” Son further averred that he had a “video recording” of Daughter “telling me that there was a 2002 will,” but when he and Daughter looked for this will at Decedent’s home, they “were unable to locate it or any copy of it.” Son also filed a petition for probate of a lost will.1 Daughter submitted a declaration in response to Son’s will contest. Daughter averred that the 1993 will “was last in Decedent’s possession,” “Decedent never told me that she created a will in 2002 that superseded her 1993 will and divided her property equally between myself and [Son],” “I previously told [Son] that [Grandchild] had seen a will in 2002, but that will was the executed 1993 will, not a will executed in 2002,” and “I am unaware of the existence of a will executed in 2002.” In a verified filing objecting to Son’s will contest and petition for probate, Grandchild stated she “has never seen or heard of a will of the [D]ecedent executed in or near the year 2002,” and “never saw any will or estate plan in the possession of the [D]ecedent other than the will that has been submitted for probate dated November 2, 1993.” Both Daughter and Grandchild averred that Decedent affirmatively told them she did not want to leave anything to Son. A hearing on both petitions for probate was held in March 2024. The hearing was continued several times to allow Son to retain an attorney, to allow the newly retained attorney time to review the case, to allow Son to retain another attorney, and to allow that new attorney time to review the case. The hearing was finally set for August 19. Prior to the August 19 hearing, Son, now represented by counsel, submitted a declaration making