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.

Matter of The James Bean Trust

Case Number

24PR00439

Case Type

Trust

Hearing Date / Time

Mon, 12/09/2024 - 08:30

Nature of Proceedings

Competing Petitions for Internal Affairs

Tentative Ruling

Probate Notes:

Appearances required.

Due to wildly improper and nonsensical filings, and the failure to use mandatory Judicial Council forms for service of pleadings in Probate Court, the procedural posture of this case is becoming increasingly difficult to track. The following is the current procedural posture of every pleading and “motion” filed to date:

                             Petition to Appoint a Successor Trustee

Filed July 23, 2024, by Victoria Jeffries.

Service: Proper and complete.

Status: At issue.   On August 21, 2024, Portia Jeffries filed a written objection to the petition, placing this matter at issue and requiring evidentiary hearing to resolve. (In re Estate of Lensch (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 667, 676; Conservatorship of Farrant (2021) 67 Cal.App.5th 370, 377.)

                                              “Petition” for Joinder

Filed August 29, 2024, by Tiffany Williams.

Service: Although initially served on an improper civil form, Proof of Service on proper Judicial Council form filed on September 10, 2024.

Status: Unresolved.  This “petition” is an improperly labeled, improperly pleaded, and procedurally inappropriate attempt by Tiffany Williams to sign on to the Aust 21st objection of Portia Jeffries to the July 23rd Petition of Victoria Jeffries.  It is recommended the Court resolve this matter at this hearing by striking this “Petition” pursuant to CCP section 436(b), because it was not filed in conformity with the laws of this State.

                               Petition to Appoint a Successor Trustee

Filed September 30, 2024, by Tiffany Williams.

Service: Incomplete.  Although the proper Judicial Council form was used, the notice was served on October 10, 2024, for the October 28, 2024, hearing, which is 12 days short of the 30 day notice requirement outlined in Probate Code section 17203.  This defect has not been resolved by reservice of at least 30 days to the interested parties.

Status: At issue.  On November 15, 2024, Victoria Jeffries filed a written objection to the petition, placing this matter at issue and requiring evidentiary hearing to resolve. (In re Estate of Lensch (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 667, 676; Conservatorship of Farrant (2021) 67 Cal.App.5th 370, 377.)

                             Petition to Appoint a Successor Trustee

Filed November 7, 2024, by Portia Jeffries.

Service: Incomplete.  After several failed attempts to file a proper Proof of Service, the proper Judicial Council form was filed on December 2, 2024. However, the notice was served on November 16, 2024, for this hearing (Dec. 9) which is 14 days short of the 30-day notice requirement outlined in Probate Code section 17203.  This defect cannot be resolved by reservice of at least 30 days to the interested parties before the hearing.

Status: At issue with service issue.  On November 15, 2024, Victoria Jeffries filed a written objection to the petition, but improperly served that objection by failing to use the mandatory Judicial Council form DE-120.  Once properly served, the objection will place this matter at issue and requiring evidentiary hearing to resolve. (In re Estate of Lensch (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 667, 676; Conservatorship of Farrant (2021) 67 Cal.App.5th 370, 377.)

                                 Three Motions of Portia Jeffries

Filed November 7, 2024, by Portia Jeffries.

Service: Incomplete.  After several failed attempts to file a proper Proof of Service, the proper Judicial Council form was filed on December 2, 2024. However, the notice was served on November 16, 2024, for this hearing (Dec. 9) which is 14 days short of the 30-day notice requirement outlined in Probate Code section 17203.  This defect cannot be resolved by reservice of at least 30 days to the interested parties before the hearing.

Status: Unresolved and service issues.  On November 17, 2024, Victoria Jeffries filed a written objection to the petition, but improperly served that objection by failing to use the mandatory Judicial Council form DE-120.  Once properly served, the objection will place this matter at issue and requiring evidentiary hearing to resolve. (In re Estate of Lensch (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 667, 676; Conservatorship of Farrant (2021) 67 Cal.App.5th 370, 377.)

Despite the service issues with the objections, it is recommended the Court resolve these three matters at this hearing by striking all three filings pursuant to CCP section 436(b), because the filings are not filed in conformity with the laws of this State.

It is recommended the Court admonish all parties to this proceeding to review all of Rule 7 of the California Rules of Court, and Probate Code sections 17203, and 1215.

Appearances:

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

Meeting ID: 161 797 5412

Passcode: 8749009

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?