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 Daryl Dean Davison

Case Number

22PR00179

Case Type

Decedent's Estate

Hearing Date / Time

Tue, 12/17/2024 - 09:00

Nature of Proceedings

Final Distribution

Tentative Ruling

Probate Notes:

Appearances required.

The following is noted for the Court at the hearing:

The proposed distribution cannot be granted since 1) the proposed distributee is not an heir of the estate, and there has been no formal assignment of estate property to that proposed distributee; and 2) there does not appear to be any assets in the estate, because the non-judicial foreclosure sale of the only property in the estate, resulted in no assets returned to the estate (i.e. negative equity sale).

A court can only order distribution according to the intent of the testator expressed in a validly executed will (Prob. Code, §§7000, 11605) or according to the law of intestacy (Prob. Code, §6400).  Any assignment must meet the requirements of Probate Code section 11604.  There appears to be no assignments here.

However, on the date of death of the Decedent, it appears from the record that the only item of property owned by Decedent was real property located at 1140 Sumner Place Unit A, Santa Maria, CA 93455, which was encumbered by multiple liens.  At some point after the date of death in 2019, one of the liens on the subject real property entered default, and the non-judicial foreclosure process ran its course, culminating in a trustee sale of the property to the proposed distributee, Juan De La Torre Gonzalez. The purchase price for the property was not higher than the amount owed on the liens that encumbered the property, so there were no assets returned to the estate after the sale.

Petitioner admits in the supplement to the pleading that a Trustee’s Deed Upon Sale for the Property was given and recorded on July 28, 2021.  At that point in time, the property was lost to the estate, and was no longer in the estate’s inventory as a matter of law.  (Dover Mobile Estates v. Fiber Form Products, Inc. (1990) 220 Cal.App.3d 1494, 1498 [title obtained by a trustee's deed on foreclosure relates back to the status of the title held by the trustor when the deed of trust was originally executed and recorded.]; Bailey v. Citibank, N.A. (2021) 66 Cal.App.5th 335, 356 [“The trustee's deed therefore passes the title held by the trustor at the time of execution, free of liens or encumbrances attaching after the deed of trust was recorded.”] (Moeller v. Lien (1994) 25 Cal. App. 4th 822, 831 (citing, e.g., Civ. Code, §2924) [“If the trustee's deed recites that all statutory notice requirements and procedures required by law for the conduct of the foreclosure have been satisfied, a rebuttable presumption arises that the sale has been conducted regularly and properly; this presumption is conclusive as to a bona fide purchaser.”].)

Therefore, as a result of the trustee sale and the use of the proceeds from that sale to payoff the liens, this petition for Final Distribution naming a stranger to the estate not only appears to be improper, but also appears to be unwarranted.  At minimum, the petition cannot be granted due to the estate having zero assets to distribute.  If petitioner now desires to close distribution, It appears a petition to close the estate via Probate Code section 12251 would be more appropriate.

Appearances:

The court is open to the public for court business. The court is also conducting hearings via Zoom videoconference.

Meeting ID: 160 543 3416

Passcode: 5053334

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?