Skip to main content.

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 Todd Davis Taylor

Case Number

25PR00106

Case Type

Decedent's Estate

Hearing Date / Time

Tue, 04/22/2025 - 09:00

Nature of Proceedings

Petition for Probate of Will and for Letters Testamentary

Tentative Ruling

Probate Notes:

The following must be submitted:

Proof of Re-Publication.  The Proof of Publication shows publication was defective.  Jurisdiction of the Probate Court is obtained by publication in accordance with Article 3 of Division 7, Part 2, Chapter 2 Probate Code.  (Prob. Code, § 8003(b).)

Publication requires the notice to be published in a newspaper adjudicated as a newspaper of general circulation in the city of decedent’s residence (Prob. Code, §§ 8121, 7122) and to contain the substantially same language and format shown in Probate Code section 8100.  If the city of decedent’s residence has no newspaper adjudicated as a newspaper of general circulation, publication must occur “in a newspaper of general circulation in the county which is circulated within the area of the county in which the decedent resided or the property is located.” (Prob. Code, §8121(b).)

The Santa Maria Times has not been adjudicated a newspaper of general circulation in the city of Lompoc, where Decedent was a resident.  A declaration of substantial compliance is not going to solve this problem (Prob. Code, § 8122), because publication in the wrong periodical by a local attorney who regularly practices probate law is not one of the “unusual cases due to confusion over jurisdictional boundaries or oversight” contemplated by Probate Code section 8122.  Further, there is no evidence submitted that shows the court that the Santa Maria Times is “widely circulated within a true cross-section of the area of the county.” (Ibid.)  Thus, re-publication is required.

Evidence of Decedent’s Intent.  Decedent’s will is not self-proving, because 1) there are no subscribing witnesses, and 2) the Testator did not date the will. (Prob. Code, §6110(c)(1).)  When a will is not self-proving under Probate Code section 6110, it can only be admitted if clear and convincing evidence proves the testator intended the will to constitute the testator’s final desire as to the disposition of the testator’s estate, pursuant to Probate Code section 6110(c)(2).

Therefore, supplement is required to meet the evidentiary standard in Probate Code section 6110(c)(2).  The supplement should point to evidence that meets the clear and convincing standard, an example of which is found in Estate of Ben-Ali (2013) 216 Cal.App.4th 1026, 1037, which includes, but is not limited to the following:

  • Age when Decedent allegedly executed the will.
  • Witness knowledge of the will or the circumstances of its execution.
  • Evidence Decedent spoke about testamentary intentions with anyone, or mentioned the will to anyone after execution of the will and prior to death.
  • Testimony as to how the typewritten will had been prepared, who had drafted it, or who Decedent might have consulted with about its terms or phrasing.
  • Location of the original copy of the will when found, and whether it was among Decedent’s belongings.

It is recommended that the matter be continued to a date to be set by the Court at the hearing, unless the party appears and requests a different date, or submits a request for a different continuance date prior to the hearing. (Local Rule 1721(c)(2)(A-B).) If the matter is continued, documents must be submitted at least 10 days prior to the new hearing date to be considered.

 

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).

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?