|
|
KEYSTONE QUARTERLY |
APRIL 2020 |
|
We hope that all of our readers are staying safe and healthy during this challenging time. Like all of us, Keystone has had to make adjustments in response to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Keystone has closed its physical office and transitioned all of its attorneys and staff to work remotely. Since that transition, Keystone has continued to be fully functional in all respects and remains committed to providing its clients with the same level of exceptional service.
To that end, Keystone is proud to be publishing the first edition of its 2020 quarterly newsletter. In this edition, Keystone has included a recap of several of its noteworthy successes from 2019, and an in-depth analysis of two recent significant probate holdings: (1) a decision which applied the “substantial benefit doctrine” to charge a portion of the Petitioner’s attorney’s fees to a beneficiary who had notice of (but chose not to participate in) litigation against a trustee; and (2) a case in which Keystone itself argued before the Court of Appeal, that clarified the timing by which a judgment-creditor could collect against a debtor’s beneficial share of a trust.
Keystone has dedicated its practice to Probate, Trust and Estate litigation and administration, and is one of the largest law firms in California devoted exclusively to this practice area. |
|
LEARN MORE |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Keystone was fortunate in 2019 to have achieved a number of significant victories for its clients. Here is a brief recap of some of Keystone’s most noteworthy 2019 successes, and a link to our 2017 and 2018 successes. |
|
READ MORE |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Smith v. Szyeller: Beneficiary Freeloaders Beware
|
|
What happens when a beneficiary – hoping to benefit from a successful litigation result without having to expend any of their own resources – chooses not to participate in litigation brought by other beneficiaries against a trustee? Smith v. Szyeller explores the potentially significant risks of such an approach, which could include being forced to pay for a portion of the litigating beneficiary’s attorney’s fees. |
|
READ MORE |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Defeating a Spendthrift Trust: Keystone
Helps Make New Law in Blech v. Blech
|
|
Keystone was counsel of record both for the trial and appellate court decisions in this recently published opinion, which discusses when a judgment-creditor may seek an order allowing collection against a judgment-debtor’s vested beneficial interest in a spendthrift trust. |
|
READ MORE |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANNOUNCEMENTS |
|
Daily Journal Publishes Keystone Article Regarding Whether a Trust Can be a Partner in a Partnership |
|
Keystone was asked by the Daily Journal to author an article entitled: High Court Likely to Confirm a Trust's Right to be Partner in Partnership. The article was published on March 4, 2020. |
|
READ MORE |
|
|
|
|
|
Keystone Attorneys Selected as 2020 Super Lawyers
|
|
Keystone attorneys have become a household name in the Southern California probate and trust litigation community. We are pleased to announce that Keystone attorneys have once again been recognized by Super Lawyers magazine. |
|
READ MORE |
|
|
|
|
|
Did You Know? Calculation of Double Damages: Probate Code Section 859 |
|
There is a split of authority in the Courts of Appeal as to how to calculate double damages under Probate Code section 859. Because of this split in authority, this issue is now ripe for resolution before the California Supreme Court. |
|
READ MORE |
|
|
|
|
|
Update: Barefoot v. Jennings Overturned |
|
In the previous edition of Keystone's Newsletter, we discussed a recent opinion in light of the Court of Appeal’s holding in Barefoot v. Jennings (2018) 27 Cal.App.5th 1. The Supreme Court has now ruled on this matter, overturning the Appellate Court’s decision and confirming the rights of disinherited beneficiaries to maintain trust contests in probate court. |
|
READ MORE |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|