When a loved one passes away, and a trust governs the distribution of their assets, heirs and beneficiaries often assume the process will be straightforward and transparent. However, if there are any red flags — such as unexpected changes to the trust — heirs and beneficiaries should not simply accept the trust at face value. Instead, they should act quickly to seek legal advice and, if necessary, take immediate action to protect their rights and ensure the decedent’s true intentions are honored.
In Hamilton v. Green (2023) 98 Cal App. 5th 417, the California Court of Appeal confirmed that missing the deadline to challenge a trust — even with serious allegations, such as forgery — can permanently bar a claim.
What Does it Mean to "Contest a Trust"?
When someone “contests a trust,” it means they are seeking to have the entire trust instrument — or specific trust amendments — invalidated. To bring a trust contest, a person must have standing (i.e., a financial stake in the outcome of the trust contest) and legitimate grounds for contesting the trust. A trust contest is distinct from challenging the actions of a trustee in administering the trust.
Under California Probate Code section 16061.7, when a trust becomes irrevocable due to the death of its creator (called the settlor, grantor or trustor), the trustee is legally required to serve a formal written notice to all beneficiaries of the trust and heirs of the decedent. This notice must inform recipients that the trust has become irrevocable, provide the identity of the trustee, and advise them of their right to request a copy of the trust.
What Is the Time Limit for Contesting a Trust?
Once properly served, California Probate Code section 16061.8 imposes a strict deadline: Beneficiaries have 120 days from the date the notice is mailed to contest the trust. If a beneficiary receives a copy of the trust instrument during such 120-day period, and the full terms had not been included with the notice, they may have 60 additional days from the date the trust is received to file a contest — whichever is later.
This deadline is crucial. Whether the potential claims involve fraud, undue influence, lack of capacity or — as in Hamilton — forgery, the California Court of Appeal has made the following clear: If the practical effect of the claim is to invalidate or set aside the trust, the 120-day limitation period applies. Missing this deadline can permanently bar even the most meritorious of claims.
Hamilton v. Green Exposes the Risks of Untimely Trust Contests
Lena Hamilton (“Decedent”) created a revocable trust in 1991, dividing her estate equally between her two children, LaDonna Green (“LaDonna”) and Eric Duane Hamilton Sr. (“Eric Sr.”). The trust provided that, if at the time of the Decedent’s death either LaDonna or Eric Sr. was “not living, or [was] later deceased, distribution shall be made to that person’s descendants, if then living.”
Eric Sr. passed away in 2004, predeceasing the Decedent. Upon his death, his sons — Dominic Hamilton (“Dominic”) and Eric Hamilton (“Eric Jr.”) — expected to inherit his share under the terms of the original trust. However, a trust amendment would soon foil their plans.
Can a Dubious Trust Amendment Be Challenged After the Time Limit for Contesting a Trust Has Lapsed?
After the Decedent’s death in 2019, LaDonna informed Dominic and Eric Jr. that a handwritten amendment, dated September 26, 2002, had changed the relevant dispositive provision of the trust to state: “[If] one beneficiary is alive all [Decedent’s] properties shall go to the survivor.” She maintained she was the sole beneficiary based on this 2002 amendment.
Dominic and Eric Jr. suspected that LaDonna had forged the amendment and questioned its validity. They filed a petition on January 13, 2020, seeking to remove the trustee, LaDonna, and compel her to produce the full trust documents.
Probate Court Ruling: Even Meritorious Trust Contests Are Time-Barred
On April 17, 2020, LaDonna served them with a trustee’s notice under Probate Code section 16061.7. In bold capital letters, the notice stated: “YOU MAY NOT BRING AN ACTION TO CONTEST THE TRUST MORE THAN 120 DAYS FROM THE DATE THE NOTIFICATION WAS SERVED UPON YOU.” LaDonna also attached a copy of the trust and the amendment.
On March 10, 2021, Dominic and Eric Jr. moved to amend their petition to challenge the validity of the 2022 amendment, asserting that it was a forgery. Dominic and Eric Jr. also sought to amend the petition to bring allegations that the invalid trust amendment did not eliminate their interests. The court denied the motion.
Can Creative Labeling Help Override the Time Limit for Contesting a Trust?
On July 29, 2021, Dominic and Eric Jr. brought a civil action against LaDonna. The complaint alleged causes of action for (1) interference with inheritance rights; (2) interference with prospective economic advantage; (3) interference with contract; (4) conversion; (5) quiet title; (6) breach of fiduciary duty; and (7) a trust accounting.
The complaint alleged that the terms of the pre-amendment trust entitled Dominic and Eric Jr. to receive their father’s interest in the trust. They claimed to have confirmed through “handwriting analysis” that the amendment was a forgery and alleged LaDonna “created the false document for the purpose of stealing their inheritance.”
On November 29, 2021, LaDonna filed a demurrer to the complaint, arguing that each cause of action was time-barred. She asserted that the complaint was effectively “an action to contest the trust” under Probate Code section 16061.8 and was therefore subject to the 120-day statute of limitations.
LaDonna argued that the complaint had the “practical effect” of contesting the trust because it challenged the validity of the amendment, and that Dominic and Eric Jr. could not prevail on their claims unless the court found the amendment to be invalid.
Trial Court Ruling: The Time Limit for Contesting a Trust Applies to Any Challenge of a Trust’s Validity
The trial court sustained LaDonna’s demurrer and dismissed the case, ruling that all seven of the claims were time-barred.
The court determined that, despite the various legal labels used in the complaint, all the claims boiled down to a challenge of the trust amendment’s validity.
Because Dominic and Eric Jr. had not brought the action within the 120-day period after receiving notice, their claims were barred under Probate Code section 16061.8
Does a Lawsuit’s Practical Effect or Label Determine If It’s a Trust Contest?
Dominic and Eric Jr. appealed the trial court’s ruling sustaining LaDonna’s demurrer without leave to amend. They argued that their civil lawsuit was not subject to the 120-day statute of limitations set forth in Probate Code section 16061.8, because, in their view, the complaint was not “an action to contest the trust.”
Appellate Court Ruling: A Trust Contest by Another Name Is Still a Trust Contest
The Court of Appeal rejected this argument, holding that the nature and practical effect of the lawsuit — not Dominic and Eric Jr.’s labeling of the claims — determines whether it qualifies as a trust contest under section 16061.8.
The court relied heavily on Estate of Stoker (2011) 193 Cal.App.4th 236, which established that a filing could constitute a trust contest — even if it is not expressly framed that way — so long as it effectively challenges the validity of a trust or trust amendment. In Stoker, a petition to probate a later will was deemed a trust contest because it directly impacted the validity of an earlier trust.
Appellate Court Ruling: Claims Effectively Contesting a Trust Are Subject to Trust Contest Time Limits
Applying that reasoning, the court found that Dominic and Eric Jr.’s claims all depended on a finding that the 2002 handwritten trust amendment was invalid. Therefore, the court concluded that their complaint was, in substance, an action to contest the trust and was subject to the 120-day time limit under section 16061.8.
The court emphasized that the statute began running on April 17, 2020, when LaDonna served the statutory notification required under Probate Code section 16061.7, which included a copy of the trust and the contested amendment. Dominic and Eric Jr. did not file their civil complaint until over a year later, on July 29, 2021 — well beyond the 120-day period.
The appellate court further dismissed the brothers’ reliance on definitions found in Probate Code section 21310, which governs “no contest” clauses, and on Estate of Lewy (1974) 39 Cal.App.3d 729, which involved similar clauses. The court explained that these authorities were inapposite, as the enforceability of a no contest clause was not at issue in this case, and Section 21310’s definition of a “direct contest” does not determine whether a claim falls under Section 16061.8.
Accordingly, the Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s ruling, concluding that the complaint was time-barred and that the demurrer was properly sustained without leave to amend.
Key Takeaway: There Is No Time to Waste When Contesting a Trust
As demonstrated by this article, timeliness is extremely important when it comes to contesting a trust. Even if you are unsure whether you wish to proceed with a contest, consulting with a probate attorney early can help ensure no critical deadlines are missed.
Review the bulleted list below for more important takeaways from this article.
- Act Immediately Upon Receiving Notice: If you believe a trust is invalid, you must take legal action within 120 days of receiving the trustee’s formal notice.
- Request the Trust in Writing Promptly: If the notice didn’t include a copy of the trust, make a written request for it right away. This might give you an extra 60 days — but only if the request is made within the original 120 days.
- Don’t Rely on Legal Labels: Naming your lawsuit “interference” or “fraud” doesn’t avoid the deadline if the effect is to challenge a trust’s validity.
- Forgery and Fraud Must Still Meet Deadlines: Serious claims, such as fraud and forgery, don’t pause or override the California Probate Code’s timing rules. If your case depends on invalidating a trust, the clock is ticking.
Still have questions about the time limit for contesting a trust?
Reading up on the statute of limitations for contesting a trust in California is a great first step. It shows you’re aware that trust contests are time-sensitive and that you are taking proactive measures to protect your inheritance rights.
At Keystone, trust and will contests are our specialty. We are experienced and provide top-tier representation to help you secure the outcome you deserve. However, timely filing is crucial to ensure your case can proceed. Whether you plan to contest a trust or not, we recommend contacting our skilled probate attorneys as soon as possible for an inspection of the trust documents and to help you claim the inheritance to which you’re entitled.
Don’t delay: Take action now, or risk losing your opportunity. Call us today to learn how we can help.
