Troncale v. Urban CA2/3
Filed 4/29/15 Troncale v. Urban CA2/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
TERESA TRONCALE, as Trustee, etc., B258379
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BP145491) v. CAROL ANN URBAN,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County,
Daniel S. Murphy, Judge. Affirmed.
Carol Ann Urban, in pro. per., for Defendant and Appellant.
Gaudy Law, Inc., Jason L. Gaudy and Andrew R. DeLoach for Plaintiff and
Respondent.
_______________________________________
Carol Ann Urban (Urban) was appointed co-trustee of a family trust of which she and her three sisters were the sole beneficiaries. One of the sisters, Teresa Troncale (Troncale), filed a petition to remove Urban as trustee on the ground that hostility between Urban and her siblings impaired the proper administration of the trust. Urban filed a “counter-claim” alleging a litany of complaints about Troncale and the other beneficiaries. The trial court removed Urban as trustee and dismissed the counter-claim without prejudice. Urban appealed and contends that the court erred in removing her as trustee. We conclude the court did not abuse its discretion and affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On April 30, 2003, the parties’ mother, Lottie Urban, established the Urban Family Trust.1 The trust appointed Urban “and/or” Troncale as the successor trustees and provided that, upon Lottie’s death, the trust estate would be divided equally among Lottie’s four daughters. The trust was later amended to provide that, upon Lottie’s death, Urban and Troncale “shall act as Co-Successor Trustees, and they must act together.” On July 10, 2003, Lottie signed a statement written by Urban (July 10 Statement) that provided “[Lottie] wants [Urban] to live [in the family home (Pasadena Property)] RENT FREE” and, in exchange, Urban would “[c]are for [Lottie] completely in her remaining years of life.” On February 9, 2013, Lottie died. The sole asset remaining in the trust was the Pasadena Property. Troncale attempted to sell that property in order to divide the proceeds of the sale among the four beneficiaries. However, Urban refused to list the property for sale. On September 27, 2013, Troncale filed a petition under Probate Code section 172002 seeking to remove Urban as co-trustee on the ground that hostility
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)