DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
2025PRDE047274·ventura·Probate·Probate
Hearing 12 days agoCONTINUED

In the Matter of Amelia Juanita Balandran

Account and Report First and Final

Hearing date
Aug 12, 2026
Department
J6
Judge
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Petition rulings statewide →

Monetary amounts referenced

$18,000$2,875.81$7,500

Parties

PetitionerFlorence M. Brewster
OtherLinda Cook
OtherBetty Balandran
OtherNorman Balandran
OtherNathan Barry
OtherOlivia Barry

Ruling

2025PRDE047274: IN THE MATTER OF AMELIA JUANITA BALANDRAN 08/12/2026 in Department J6 Account and Report First and Final

Petitioner Florence M. Brewster proposes to distribute the estate equally to the decedent’s children Linda Cook, Betty Balandran, Norman Balandran, and herself. However, the original probate petition identified a predeceased daughter, Norma Barry, who died with the following issue: Nathan Barry and Olivia Barry. Why are Nathan Barry and Olivia Barry each not entitled to a 10% share of the estate? (Prob. Code, §§ 240, 6402, subd. (a).)

The real property asset is proposed to be distributed in kind. Do all heirs, including Nathan Barry and Olivia Barry if they qualify, consent to such distribution, as opposed to the property being sold and the proceeds distributed?

Petitioner is directed to serve and file a verified supplement that answers the foregoing questions. If all heirs consent, their written consents should be attached.

Subject to the foregoing, approve the first and final account and report. Approve $18,000 in statutory fees to Petitioner. Approve $2,875.81 in costs reimbursement to Petitioner. The Court disallows $7,500 spent on document preparation services. How will the fees and costs be paid given the lack of liquidity in the estate?

Assuming that the Barry children are heirs, the estate is to be distributed 20% each to Linda Cook, Betty Balandran, Norman Balandran, and Petitioner and 10% each to the Barry children.

If the Barry children are not heirs, the estate is to be distributed 25% each to the decedent’s surviving children.

1

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