DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
01426688·orange·Probate·Trust
Hearing 2 months agoGRANTED

Sanburg - Trust

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND

Hearing date
Jun 17, 2026
Department
CM7
Judge
Prevailing
Moving Party

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PetitionerPaula Sanburg Ruby
DefendantPhil Kerbis

Ruling

Carpenter & Zuckerman, LLP v. Cohen (2011) 195 Cal.App.4th 373, 375.)

01426688 Sanburg - TENTATIVE RULING Trust Case: Sanburg - Trust 01426688

Calendar No.: 8

Date: 06/17/2026

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND (ROA 158)

Petitioner Paula Sanburg Ruby (“Petitioner”), in propria persona, moves for leave to file a Third Amended Petition to add “Phil Kerbis, as co-successor trustee” as a Respondent in this case.

This motion came before the court on 4/15/26 at which time it was continued for compliance with California Rules of Court, rule 3.1324. Instead of filing a declaration that complies with Rule 3.1324 and attaching a copy of the Proposed Third Amended Petition to the declaration, Petitioner filed a new motion for leave to amend (ROA 243) along with a compliant declaration (ROA 244). Petitioner also filed the Proposed Third Amended Petition. (ROA 245.) This subsequently filed motion has been set for hearing on 9/2/26. The court understands that these newly filed documents were intended to be supplements to the initially filed motion for leave to amend.

Counsel has now fully complied with Rule 3.1324. The motion is GRANTED.

Petitioner shall file the Third Amended Petition within 10 days of this ruling. The Third Amended Petition shall be identical in content to the Proposed Third Amended Petition filed by Petitioner on 5/12/16. (ROA 245.)

The motion for leave to amend set for 9/2/26 is VACATED.

01451379 Keane – Trust TENTATIVE RULING

Case: Keane – Trust 01451379

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…
Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.

Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities

Ask about this ruling

Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”

Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Find similar rulings

Source

Share