DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
26PB-0033406·shasta·Probate·Estate Administration
Hearing about 2 months agoCONTINUED

ESTATE OF JACQUELINE LEE

Petition for Probate of Will

Hearing date
Jul 6, 2026
Department
44
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
Aug 17, 2026
Appearance
Not required

Motion type

Browse all Petition rulings statewide →

Parties

OtherJacqueline Lee

Ruling

CASE NUMBER: 26PB-0033406 This matter is on calendar for hearing on a Petition for Probate of Will. The matter has not been properly noticed. There is no proof of service for any parties entitled to notice. A copy of the will has not been attached to the Petition as required by item 3f; however, a copy of the will was attached to a Notice of Petition to Administer Estate. The will is handwritten, therefore a typed copy is also required to be submitted. Additionally, the will is attested so Proof of Subscribing Witness is required to be filed.

The Petition requests the requirement of a bond be waived, but the will does not waive bond. Proof of publication has not been filed. The Court notes the Public Administrator has filed a Petition for Letters of Administration set for hearing on July 20, 2026. This matter is continued to Monday, August 17, 2026, at 2:30 p.m. in Department 44 for further proceedings on the Petition for Probate of Will. An amended Petition is required to be filed to address the issues raised above. Proof of Subscribing Witness must be filed.

Petitioner is required to file and serve a new Notice of Petition to Administer Estate for the continued hearing date, along with a copy of the amended Petition, on all parties entitled to notice. Proof of publication is required to be filed. No appearance is necessary on today’s calendar.

ESTATE OF CALEB MARCHI

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