Estate of Joyce Barnett Gallagher

Case Number

24PR00709

Case Type

Hearing Date / Time

Tue, 10/07/2025 - 09:00

Nature of Proceedings

Multiple Petitions

Tentative Ruling

Probate Notes:

Appearances required.

The following is noted for the Court at the hearing:

Removal of Personal Representative

On February 11, 2025, this Court appointed Barry Vanderkelen as personal representative of the Estate of Joyce Barnett Gallagher. 

On July 12, 2025, a stranger to the estate, Isabel Espinoza, filed a Petition for Probate of Will and Letters Testamentary, which improperly requested the revocation of the Letters of Administration issued to Mr. Vanderkelen.  The request was improper, because in order to “revoke” letters issued to a personal representative of the estate, a petition for removal of the personal representative must be filed pursuant to Probate Code section 8500. 

At the hearing on August 5, 2025, the Court continued the matter and ordered a petition for removal be filed pursuant to Probate Code section 8500. Isabel Espinoza filed that Petition for Removal of the Personal Representative on August 22, 2025, and that petition received objection on September 2, 2025.  The objection places the two petitions by Isabel Espinoza at issue, 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.)

Challenge to Proffered Estate Plan

In addition to the above filings, on August 25, 2025, Tedd Barnett filed a very confusingly titled petition that appears to be challenging the purported estate plan submitted by Ms. Espinoza, pursuant to Probate Code sections §8000, §8004(b), §8250 et seq., §8402, §8502(b) and (d), and §17200(a) and (b).  That petition contained what appears to be the following causes/requests:

1. A will contest (“PETITION TO CONTEST POUR-OVER WILL AND GROUNDS OF OPPOSITION TO PROBATE OF PURPORTED WILL).
2. Internal Affairs of a Trust (“PETITION TO CONTEST THE JT LIVING TRUST INSTRUMENT AND GROUNDS THEREOF”)
3. Objection to Petition for Probate filed by Espinoza (OBJECTION TO APPOINT ISABEL ESPINOZA AS EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF JOYCE BARNETT GALLAGHER”)
4. Objection to Petition for Removal filed by Espinoza (OPPOSITION TO RESPONDENT'S PETITION TO REMOVE PREVIOUSLY APPOINTED ADMINISTRATOR …”)
5. Objection to Petition for Successor Administrator (“…AND FOR APPOINTMENT OF NOMINATED EXECUTOR”)
6. Continuance (“REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE TO ALLOW DISCOVERY”)
7. Request for Trial (“REQUEST FOR TRIAL”)

Mr. Barnett’s objections place all pleadings in this matter at issue, requiring evidentiary hearing to resolve.

However, at least part of Mr. Barnett’s pleading outlined above is improper in this case, because the Petition for Internal Affairs attacks a trust that has not been properly brought under court supervision.  Thus, that matter should be denied outright, or stricken from the pleading pursuant to CCP section 437(b).

It is recommended the Court order all written objections to all filed pleadings that are not on file before the hearing are waived pursuant to CRC, Rule 7.801, and set this matter for trial.

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