DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
26CV000895·napa·Civil·Name Change
Hearing 2 months agoGRANTED

In The Matter of Derrik Lee Fry-Herkins

PETITION FOR CHANGE OF NAME

Hearing date
Jun 16, 2026
Department
Dept. A
Prevailing
Moving Party
Appearance
Not required

Motion type

Browse all Petition rulings statewide →

Parties

PetitionerDerrik Lee Fry-Herkins

Ruling

counsel, the Court notes that the Proposed Conservatee’s counsel was served on 6/9/26 and, therefore, may be prepared to proceed with the hearing. In the interests of efficiency, because all other parties entitled to notice have been served with timely notice of the hearing, the Court requires appearances to ascertain whether the Proposed Conservatee is prepared to proceed with the hearing. If the Proposed Conservatee’s counsel represents that he is not prepared to proceed due to lack of sufficient notice, the matter will be continued at the hearing.

Estate of Robin J Lantz 26PR000106

PETITION FOR PROBATE OF WILL AND FOR LETTERS TESTAMENTARY AND AUTHORIZATION TO ADMINISTER UNDER THE INDEPENDENT ADMINISTRATION OF ESTATES ACT

TENTATIVE RULING: The Petition1 is GRANTED. Richard S. Thomas is appointed as probate referee. The matter is set for a Status Hearing Re: Final Distribution on June 16, 2027, at 8:30 a.m. in Dept. A. The Status Hearing may be vacated or continued without appearances needed if, prior thereto, the personal representative files a petition for an order for final distribution or a report of status of administration pursuant to Probate Code section 12200. The clerk is directed to provide notice to the parties.

CIVIL LAW & MOTION CALENDAR – Hon. Cynthia P. Smith, Dept. A (Historic Courthouse) at 8:30 a.m.

In The Matter of Derrik Lee Fry-Herkins 26CV000895

PETITION FOR CHANGE OF NAME

TENTATIVE RULING: Notice has been properly published and no written objections have been filed. The petition is GRANTED without need for appearance.

1 Given that the Petition attaches decedent’s will (naming Petitioner as executor) and requests it be admitted to probate, the Court assumes the indications in the title of the Petition for “Letters of Special Administration” and in the Proposed Letters for “administrator of the decedent’s estate” are inadvertent errors. The Court construes the Petition as only one for Probate of Will and for Letters Testamentary.

2

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