Skip to main content.

Fraud Alert: Scam Text Messages Claiming DMV Penalties -

We have been made aware of fraudulent text messages being sent to individuals claiming to be from the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) or the court system. These messages often state that the recipient owes penalties or fees related to traffic violations or DMV infractions and may include a link or phone number to resolve the matter. 

Take these steps to reduce the chances of falling victim to a text message scam:

  • Never respond to unsolicited or suspicious texts — If you receive a message asking for personal or financial information, do not reply.
  • Verify the source — If you are unsure, always contact the DMV through official channels.
  • Call the DMV if you have concerns — The DMV customer service team is available to help you at 800-777-0133.

Please see DMV warning about fraudulent texts: https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/news-and-media/dmv-warns-of-fraudulent-te…

Jury Scam alert -

The Santa Barbara Superior Court has received complaints about individuals trying to scam members of the public by pretending to be court officers or officials. The Jury Services office of the Santa Barbara Superior Court does not call citizens to request payments for failing to appear for jury duty. California law does not permit citizens to pay a fine in lieu of jury duty. If you receive such a call simply hang up and, if the scammer persists, call your local law enforcement agency. Learn more about the recent scam warning.

Notice to Jurors:

Prospective jurors summoned for jury service can expect to receive their jury summons in postcard form. Please check your mail for a postcard with important instructions to fulfil your jury service. Visit the Jury Services page for more information.

Estate of Mary Kay Alexander

Case Number

21PR00264

Case Type

Decedent's Estate

Hearing Date / Time

Mon, 12/04/2023 - 08:30

Nature of Proceedings

Petition for Final Distribution

Tentative Ruling

Probate Notes:

Appearances required. The following is noted for the Court at the hearing:

Insufficient Disclaimer.  A disclaimer of interest must meet the requirements of Probate Code section 275 et seq. The disclaimer attached to the Petition does not meet these requirements, because 1) it was not filed with the court a reasonable time after the interest vested in the disclaimant, and 2) does not accurately describe “the interest to be disclaimed” pursuant to Probate Code section 278(b). 

The reasons it is recommended the Court reject the disclaimer are clear: the disclaiming party has made no indication that they know exactly what they are disclaiming, nor does it appear the disclaiming party has been given any indication of the extent of the interest in the property being disclaimed.  For example, there is no proof of service of any document containing a description of the interest in the equity of property being sent to the disclaiming party.  The supplement was not served, and the Petition for Final Distribution lacked said detail.  Merely stating a disclaimer of all interest in an estate, which was done in this disclaimer, is not sufficient.  A person can easily be misled about the extent of their interest in an estate, thus the requirement of specificity must be followed to sufficiently inform the court that the disclaiming party is perfectly aware just what they stand to lose via the disclaimer.

The Probate Code plainly states the requirements of Division 2, Part 8, Chapter 2 of the Probate Code (§275 et. seq) must be met for the disclaimer to be effective.  Since the disclaimer is not effective, the disclaiming party may assign his/her rights in the property to the petitioner after distribution to the petitioner and disclaiming party are made.  (Prob. Code, §288.)

It is otherwise recommended the Court reject the disclaimer.

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 distribution to each (Prob. Code, § 11603), which includes the exact legal description of real property on hand for distribution. Due to the issues above with the disclaimer, it is recommended the court order petitioner to resubmit the proposed order using Local Form SC-6029, and include distribution to the disclaimant and petitioner.

Was this helpful?

Yes No
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Was this helpful?