Estate of Blackburn CA4/3
Filed 8/8/23 Estate of Blackburn CA4/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
Estate of LINDA JEAN BLACKBURN, Deceased.
GARY BRACKEN, G061044 Petitioner and Appellant, (Super. Ct. No. 30-2019-01097062) v. OPINION CAROL CLAYMAN et al.,
Contestants and Respondents.
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Aaron W. Heisler, Temporary Judge. (Pursuant to Cal. Const., art. VI, § 21.) Affirmed. Alan S. Yockelson for Petitioner and Appellant. Magee & Adler and Eric R. Adler for Contestant and Respondent Carol Clayman. Madden, Jones, Cole & Johnson and Montgomery Cole for Contestant and Respondent Patricia Jean Leue.
INTRODUCTION Under Probate Code section 6100.5, subdivision (a)1, a testatrix is not considered mentally competent to make a will if she lacks “sufficient mental capacity to” understand what she is doing, know the scope of her property, or know who her living descendants are. In this case, a disinherited brother of the testatrix brought a contest challenging her mental capacity to make her will. Essentially, he sought to convince the trial court his sister did not know or understand her husband had died. The trial court was not persuaded by the brother’s armchair diagnosis, and we affirm its order denying his contest and admitting his sister’s will to probate. FACTS Linda and Greg Blackburn were married for over 40 years, and according to many accounts, were metaphorically joined at the hip until Greg’s death on June 13, 2019. The two never had any children, and Linda’s parents predeceased her. Linda’s sole sibling was appellant Gary Bracken, who would have been her heir if she had died intestate. In recent years, and in June 2019 itself, the two had been involved in an acrimonious dispute in and out of court concerning their mother, Marjorie, and her estate. Given their deteriorating relationship, Linda met with an attorney, Denae Oatey, after Greg’s death in order to remove Gary as a beneficiary of her will. The resulting document was executed on June 18, 2019. In it, Linda – in a most peculiar twist – named Greg as her executor and left the residue of her estate to him if he were to survive her . . . even though he had died five days prior. However, the will also named successor executors to replace Greg in the event of his death – Linda’s old friend, respondent Carol Clayman, and Linda’s cousin, respondent Patricia Jean Leue. Linda also named contingent beneficiaries in place of Greg; of course, Gary was not one of them.
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)