In the Matter of Conservatorship of Rey Jesucristo Solano Acevedo

The personal representative may also wish to retain funds for any undisclosed or unknown liabilities, especially tax deficiencies later assessed against the decedent or the estate. Apart from the reserve for estate taxes, there are some drawbacks to setting the reserve aside specifically for possible future tax deficiencies. Such action indicates--especially if the reserve is a substantial one--misgivings about the validity of the estate's position. The reserve might also be considered a trust fund for payment of the taxes, thus extending the statutory period for assessment. See U.S. v Rose (3d Cir 1965) 346 F2d 985, 989.

In addition, if the personal representative requests that the court allow for a substantial reserve (or even a reserve of more than $5,000), some courts will refuse to characterize the distribution as "final" and will require additional accounts (or waivers) before permitting distribution of any balance of the reserve. For example, in Contra Costa County, the court will not characterize the distribution as final if the personal representative requests more than a nominal reserve. If the entire estate will be distributed to a single beneficiary, such as a trust established during the decedent's lifetime, a reserve may not be necessary. (Cal. Dec. Est. Pract. (CEB 2023), Sec.31.66.)

Accordingly, if the probable tax liability of the estate is so high as to require the requested amount in reserve, it is recommended the Court deem this estate not to be in a condition to be closed. At the very least, the Court should require a final accounting and petition for distribution be set a reasonable time after the last year's tax liability is due.

Proposed Order. A proposed order must be submitted with relief that matches that requested in the petition. (Local Rule 1724(b), subd.(d).) Order must list every beneficiary and detail the shares to each, and must expressly state limitations or conditions on distribution. (Prob. Code, Sec. 11603.) It is highly recommended petitioner use Local Form SC-6029. No such document was filed with the court.

If the documents curing these deficiencies are not processed by 8:00 a.m. on July 13, 2026, it is recommended that the matter be continued to a date to be set by the Court at the hearing, unless the party appears and requests a different date, or submits a request for a different continuance date prior to the hearing. (Local Rule 1721(c)(2)(A-B).) If the matter is continued, documents must be submitted at least 10 days prior to the new hearing date to be considered.

Due to staffing limitations, processing times may be delayed. To assist in processing, attorneys and parties should include the next court date in the "Filing Description" field provided by the electronic service provider. That field is also used for further descriptions of the document being e-filed, so be sure to put the calendar date FIRST in the field - BEFORE any further description of the document being e-filed (e.g.: 06/28/16 For XYZ).

Tentative Ruling: Conservatorship of Rey Jesucristo Solano Acevedo Tentative Ruling: Conservatorship of Rey Jesucristo Solano Acevedo Case Number

Case Type Conservatorship Hearing Date / Time Thu, 07/29/2027 - 09:30 Nature of Proceedings Conservatorship Compliance Hearing Tentative Ruling Probate Notes: No appearances required. Compliance achieved.

Tentative Ruling: Conservatorship of Rodrigo Madrigal Ruvalcaba Tentative Ruling: Conservatorship of Rodrigo Madrigal Ruvalcaba