DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
PR0001389·marin·Probate·Trust Administration
Hearing about 2 months agoCONTINUED

IN THE MATTER OF THE GREVESMUHL-YOUNG REVOCABLE TRUST UDT 06/19/ 2009

Verified Petition for Order; Verified Petition for Orders

Hearing date
Jul 23, 2026
Department
C
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
Sep 10, 2026

Motion type

Browse all Petition rulings statewide →

Causes of action

Parties

OtherMaria L. Mandolini

Attorneys

Ruling

PR0001389 IN THE MATTER OF THE GREVESMUHL-YOUNG REVOCABLE TRUST UDT 06/19/2009

1. Verified Petition for Order: (1) Determining claim to Trust Property (Probate Code § 850); (2) Cancellation of Void Instrument (Civil Code § 3412); (3) Imposition of Constructive Trust; (4) Financial Elder Abuse; (5) Double Damages (Probate Code § 859); (6) Accounting and Surcharge; (7) Fraud, filed by Maria L. Mandolini on 4/15/26.

2. Verified Petition for Orders: (1) Determining Claim to Trust Property (Probate Code § 850); (2) Cancelling Void or Voidable Instruments (Civil Code § 3412); (3) Quiet Title and Declaratory Relief; (4) Financial Elder Abuse; (5) Fraud; (6) Undue Influence; (7) Constructive Trust; (8) Accounting; (9) Negligence; (10) Temporary Restraining Order and Order to Show Cause Re Preliminary Injunction to Enjoin Collection, Default, Foreclosure, Assignment, Servicing Transfer, Adverse Credit Reporting, and Enforcement Activity Regarding 10 Warrens Way, Tiburon, California; and (11) Related Equitable Reli9ef, filed by Maria L. Mandolini on 5/18/26.

Ruling. Both petitions are continued to September 10, 2026, at 9:00 a.m. for filing proof of service confirming that thirty days’ notice was served in compliance with Probate Code section 17203, subd. (b) (“in the manner provided in Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 413.10) of Title 5 of Part 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure on any person, other than a trustee or beneficiary, whose right, title, or interest would be affected by the petition...”).

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