Yee v. Yee
Filed 7/17/06 Yee v. Yee CA2/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
| FLORINA FORTUNA YEE, a Minor, etc., Plaintiff and Appellant, v. FABIANA YEE and CHRISTINE YEE, Defendants and Respondents. ___________________________________ FABIANA YEE and CHRISTINE YEE, Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. FLORINA FORTUNA YEE, a Minor, etc., et al., Defendant and Respondent. | B183819 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BP088629) |
APPEALS from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, William F. Fahey, Judge. Affirmed.
Law Offices of Randolph M. Sharon and Randolph M. Sharon for Plaintiffs and Appellants Fabiana Yee and Christine Yee.
Quan Cohen & Hirano and Arthur D. Cohen for Plaintiff and Appellant Florina Fortuna Yee.
_________________________________
INTRODUCTION
Shortly before he died, the decedent executed a revocable trust and three weeks later executed an amendment which altered the disposition of trust assets to his two older daughters from a former marriage, to his second wife, and to their baby. Two appeals arise from a judgment entered after a trial court denied the baby's petition to determine the validity of a trust provision which disinherited her and denied the older daughters' petition seeking to enforce a no contest provision of the Trust against the second wife.
The baby's petition, brought by her guardian ad litem, sought to invalidate the amendment disinheriting her on the basis that the amendment was procured by undue influence of one of the older daughters. The baby, however, did not provide evidence to establish the presumption of undue influence, and therefore the presumption in favor of the regularity of the Trust requires affirmance of the judgment denying this petition.
The older daughters' petition sought to enforce a no contest clause in the Trust against the decedent's second wife, who was appointed guardian ad litem of the baby and who represented the baby in her petition to invalidate the amendment. We conclude that because the guardian ad litem was not a party to a proceeding, did not act in her own behalf, was not the real party in interest, and could not have a judgment entered for or against her on her daughter's petition, the no contest provision, strictly construed, did not apply to the second wife acting as guardian ad litem for the baby. Moreover, the evidence showed that enforcing the no contest provision to disinherit the second wife would contradict the decedent's intent to provide for both his surviving wife and baby. Therefore the trial court correctly denied the older daughters' petition to enforce the no contest clause.
We affirm the judgment.
PROCEDURAL and FACTUAL HISTORY
The Parties: Frank Yee,[1] the decedent and trustor, married Qiao-Er Zhao, also known as Tina Yee, on January 7, 2002. Frank and Tina were the parents of Florina Fortuna Yee, born in July 2003. Frank had two adult daughters from a prior marriage, Fabiana Yee and Christine Yee, half-sisters of Florina.
Execution of the Trust and the Amendment: On August 5, 2004, Frank, as trustor, executed a document creating the Frank Yee Revocable Trust Agreement (â€
