DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
2025PRDE047272·ventura·Probate·Probate
Hearing 11 days agoThe Court will approve the final account subject to a verified supplement explaining the cost retainer discrepancy. Approves $8,096.22 in statutory fees to Petitioner and counsel, and $1,500 cost reimbursement subject to resolution.

IN THE MATTER OF BRIAN BELLIVEAU

Account and Report First and Final

Hearing date
Aug 13, 2026
Department
J6
Judge
Prevailing
Moving Party

Motion type

Browse all Petition rulings statewide →

Monetary amounts referenced

$1,500$1,271.76$8,096.22

Parties

OtherBrian Belliveau
OtherRonald T. Belliveau
OtherYvonne Castelli
OtherHelen Gangale

Ruling

2025PRDE047272: IN THE MATTER OF BRIAN BELLIVEAU 08/13/2026 in Department J6 Account and Report First and Final

Petitioner seeks reimbursement of a $1,500 cost retainer paid to counsel. The Court notes that each of the items appearing in Exhibit 4 (itemized expenses paid from cost retainer) appear in Schedule C for Disbursements. Thus, the disbursements total appears to be $1,271.76 more than it should be. Explanation? Petitioner is directed to serve and file a verified supplement explaining the discrepancy.

Subject to the foregoing, the Court will approve the final account. Approve $8,096.22 in statutory fees each to Petitioner and counsel. Approve the cost reimbursement of $1,500 to Petitioner assuming that the discrepancy noted above has been satisfactorily resolved and does not preclude reimbursement.

The proposed final distribution of the estate equally to Petitioner, Ronald T. Belliveau, Yvonne Castelli and Helen Gangale is consistent with the laws of intestate succession.

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