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 Brockhaus Family Trust

Case Number

24PR00566

Case Type

Trust

Hearing Date / Time

Tue, 12/17/2024 - 09:00

Nature of Proceedings

Petition to Determine Claim to Property

Tentative Ruling

Probate Notes:

Appearances required. 

This matter began with a Petition filed by John Brockhaus on October 3, 2024, praying the Court instruct the trustee of the subject trust as to the proper interpretation of a distribution clause in the subject trust. That Petition did not receive objection, and was dismissed on December 13, 2024.

Jaclyn Passmore filed a Petition to Determine Claim to Property that prays this Court interpret the subject trust in a manner that could have conflicted with interpretation prayed for by John Brockhaus in the Petition for Instructions.  Even though the John Brockhaus petition was dismissed and no objection has been filed to the Jaclyn Passmore petition, the petition cannot be recommended for approval without the submission of the deceased settlor’s Last Will and Testament, as outlined below.

The following must be submitted as a result:

Last Will and Testament of Settlor.  This case hinges on the interpretation of the Decedent’s testamentary instruments; a trust and a will.  The trust was submitted as an attachment to the Petition for Internal Affairs submitted by John Brockhaus.  The will has not been submitted.

In the trust, the distribution provision at issue in this case (§6.05 “Distribution of Trust”) specifically points to the Last Will and Testament of the deceased settlor as dispositive of the power of appointment:

Upon the death of the Settlor, the successor Trustee, as soon as reasonably practical, shall terminate the Trust and distribute all the principal of the

Trust then in the possession of the Trustee to such persons as the Settlor shall appoint by specific reference to this power of appointment in her Last Will and Testament, regardless of whether it has been submitted for probate.

Thus, only should the settlor not exercise that power in a Last Will and Testament, will the distribution provisions of the trust be at issue.  Thus, the Court must have a copy of the Last Will and Testament of the settlor in order to properly interpret the trust and provide the requested instructions to the trustee.

Proposed Order (Local Rule, 1731.) – Petitioner must submit a proposed orders outlining the exact relief requested in the petitions.

Due to staffing limitations, processing times may be delayed. To assist in processing, attorneys and parties should include the next court date in the “Filing Description” field provided by the electronic service provider. That field is also used for further descriptions of the document being e-filed, so be sure to put the calendar date FIRST in the field – BEFORE any further description of the document being e-filed (e.g.: 06/28/16 For XYZ).

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?