Bailey v. Bailey

Filed 10/10/23

CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

GEORGE A. BAILEY, et al., 2d Civ. No. B320664 (Super. Ct. No. 20PR00422) Petitioners and Respondents, (Santa Barbara County)

v.

MITCHELL A. BAILEY,

Objector and Appellant.

Appellant Mitchell Bailey is the only child of the late James Bailey. Mitchell1 opposed respondent Olan Mills II’s petition to probate a 2001 will that effectively denied Mitchell any share of his father’s estate. The court approved the petition and admitted the will to probate. Mitchell appeals. He contends Mills filed his petition beyond the period allowed by Probate Code section 8226, subdivision (c).2 We affirm.

1 We use first names to avoid confusion. No disrespect is intended. 2 Unlabeled statutory cites are to the Probate Code.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND James Harvey Bailey (Harvey) died on October 16, 2020. Harvey’s brother, George Bailey, petitioned for letters of administration on November 6, 2020 and sought appointment as special administrator of the estate. The petition alleged Harvey died intestate with estimated assets of $575,000, including his single-family home in Orcutt, California. Theia Bailey, Harvey’s sister, and appellant Mitchell were the only persons served with the petition. George subsequently found a document dated February 12, 2001, entitled “Last Will and Testament of James Harvey Bailey” among Harvey’s effects. He lodged it with the court on December 22, 2020 and served copies on Theia, Mitchell, and himself. The will bequeathed Harvey’s common stock in General Electric and other companies to Mitchell. It specified a cash gift to his friend and former employer, respondent Olan Mills II. The balance of the estate went to various individuals, charities, and schools. George and Mitchell appeared on January 5, 2021 for the petition hearing. The court asked whether George planned to admit the will to probate. George said he did not. His immediate plan was to obtain letters of administration so he could open an estate bank account, pay Harvey’s outstanding debts, and marshal the estate’s assets. The will’s validity, he explained, could be litigated once these more pressing matters were addressed. The court agreed. It approved the intestate petition so George could “get things organized” and assured Mitchell that George was not yet authorized to “divide any money up.” It filed a probate order on January 13 finding Harvey died intestate. Letters of administration issued on February 17. George served the will’s beneficiaries, including respondent Mills, with a document entitled “Notice to Potential Beneficiary of Petition for Letters of Administration Under Probate Code