Tuolumne — Probate Notes for December 19, 2025

Source: https://www.tuolumne.courts.ca.gov/system/files/general/pb_d5_12192025_0.pdf

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Probate Notes Steven S. Streger, Probate Commissioner

Department 5 December 19, 2025 8:30 am DA Case # Date Filed

1 PR12703 Estate of Dave Kamps aka David Kamps aka David John Kamps 09/22/2025

Diane J Pasma Attorney: Eric Capron

David John Kamps

Determine Succ to Real Property

FURTHER

09/22/2025 Petition File Tracking 09/24/2025 High Density Other Cases PR12708

Probate Notes are not tentative rulings. Parties and counsel are expected to appear for the hearings unless this note indicates that “no appearance is
necessary.” Unless a personal appearance is required, all participants may appear via Zoom without first securing Court permission using this link:
https://tuolumne-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1615813960?pwd=NTRMT0NwMDg5cnlYdzZ6VnBXWWFsUT09. [Meeting ID: 161 581 3960; Passcode:
123456]. All matters set for hearing in Department 5 are presumptively assigned to that department for all purposes. Parties retain the right under Cal.
Const. art VI §21 to decline consent to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem. By participating in the first hearing, or electing not to attend after due
notice thereof, parties are deemed to have stipulated to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem for the entire case. See CRC 2.816.

Commissioner already serving as Judge for all purposes.

No appearance is necessary.

This is the continued hearing on a probate avoidance by-pass petition to determine testate succession to
a decedent’s purported primary residence. Notice to all of the interested persons appears to be
satisfied. See §§ 13151(b) and 13153. The legal basis for the putative succession (§13152(a)(4)) is by
Last Will & Testament, and a review of the proffered instrument provides a satisfactory prima facie
showing of validity and due execution for that will to be admissible (though a DE131 would be ideal).
This Court will accept petitioner’s sworn statement that “the described real property was the decedent's
primary residence” (§13152(a)(3)) even though her statement technically fails to establish personal
knowledge of that fact. The only unforgivable issue at the time was an absence of competent proof that
the residence was “property of the decedent” at the time of his passing (§§ 13152(a)(3), 13154(b)(4)).
Petitioner has since supplemented the petition with a noncertified title guarantee confirming vestiture in
the decedent’s sole name at the time of his passing (and henceforth). With this additional evidence, the
petition is ready for approval. The order will be signed this date. Petitioner shall arrange for the
certified copy as will be needed to effectively transfer title.

Petition granted.

12/16/2025 8:24 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Probate Notes Steven S. Streger, Probate Commissioner

Department 5 December 19, 2025 8:30 am DA Case # Date Filed

2 PR12439 Estate of Gerald Duane Campbell 03/27/2024

Jeffrey Campbell Attorney: Carrie McKernan

Gerald Duane Campbell

Vickie L Campbell Pro Per

Final Distribution Hearing

FURTHER

03/27/2024 Petition File Tracking 01/30/2025 From Court-Probate on Calendar

Probate Notes are not tentative rulings. Parties and counsel are expected to appear for the hearings unless this note indicates that “no appearance is
necessary.” Unless a personal appearance is required, all participants may appear via Zoom without first securing Court permission using this link:
https://tuolumne-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1615813960?pwd=NTRMT0NwMDg5cnlYdzZ6VnBXWWFsUT09. [Meeting ID: 161 581 3960; Passcode:
123456]. All matters set for hearing in Department 5 are presumptively assigned to that department for all purposes. Parties retain the right under Cal.
Const. art VI §21 to decline consent to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem. By participating in the first hearing, or electing not to attend after due
notice thereof, parties are deemed to have stipulated to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem for the entire case. See CRC 2.816.

Commissioner already serving as Judge for all purposes.

Before the Court this day is the continued hearing on the final petition to close this intestate estate and
approve the proposed distribution to four heirs with allowance of fees and costs. At the prior hearing, this
Court addressed the missing supplemental DE-160 covering the $100,000 inheritance, the tax
implications for the proposed gift/assignment, and the proposed surcharge against Vicki for her early
partial distribution (rather than a reduction in the gross estate). Based on counsel’s candor, this Court
continued the hearing to permit Vicki time to object. Since that hearing, counsel has filed a
supplemental DE-160 and a supplement to the petition itself. Also occurring in the intervening weeks:
Vicki filed an objection. The objection does not include a proof of service, so this Court will proceed as
if petitioner’s silence in the face of the objection is due to petitioner’s ignorance of the objection rather
than his acquiescence. This Court would appreciate a written response to the objection, which
presents a prima facie basis for challenging the proposed surcharge.

12/16/2025 8:24 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Probate Notes Steven S. Streger, Probate Commissioner

Department 5 December 19, 2025 8:30 am DA Case # Date Filed

3 FL19312 Wynter Garcia vs. Lily HensleyNewquist 11/18/2025

Wynter Garcia Pro Per

Lily HensleyNewquist

OSC Hearing - TRO/Domestic Violence

to trail PR12704

11/18/2025 Petition File Tracking 11/21/2025 High Density

Probate Notes are not tentative rulings. Parties and counsel are expected to appear for the hearings unless this note indicates that “no appearance is
necessary.” Unless a personal appearance is required, all participants may appear via Zoom without first securing Court permission using this link:
https://tuolumne-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1615813960?pwd=NTRMT0NwMDg5cnlYdzZ6VnBXWWFsUT09. [Meeting ID: 161 581 3960; Passcode:
123456]. All matters set for hearing in Department 5 are presumptively assigned to that department for all purposes. Parties retain the right under Cal.
Const. art VI §21 to decline consent to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem. By participating in the first hearing, or electing not to attend after due
notice thereof, parties are deemed to have stipulated to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem for the entire case. See CRC 2.816.

This hearing is actually set for 10:00 a.m., not 8:30 a.m.

It is related to a pending petition to establish a guardianship.

12/16/2025 8:24 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Probate Notes Steven S. Streger, Probate Commissioner

Department 5 December 19, 2025 8:30 am DA Case # Date Filed

4 PR12607 In re: The Berchtold Living Trust 02/18/2025

Richard Berchtold Attorney: Anthony Johnston

Dannie Berchtold

Petition Hearing

FURHTER - Full Report From Receiver

02/18/2025 Petition File Tracking 03/17/2025 High Density

Probate Notes are not tentative rulings. Parties and counsel are expected to appear for the hearings unless this note indicates that “no appearance is
necessary.” Unless a personal appearance is required, all participants may appear via Zoom without first securing Court permission using this link:
https://tuolumne-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1615813960?pwd=NTRMT0NwMDg5cnlYdzZ6VnBXWWFsUT09. [Meeting ID: 161 581 3960; Passcode:
123456]. All matters set for hearing in Department 5 are presumptively assigned to that department for all purposes. Parties retain the right under Cal.
Const. art VI §21 to decline consent to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem. By participating in the first hearing, or electing not to attend after due
notice thereof, parties are deemed to have stipulated to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem for the entire case. See CRC 2.816.

Commissioner already serving as Judge for all purposes.

Before the Court this day is the continued hearing on a trust petition to compel reporting/accounting,
and distribution, with possible surcharge against the “acting” trustee or suspension thereof. At issue is
trust administration for the better part of a decade by one of two co-trustees, despite the statutory
obligation that both must act (see §§ 15620 and 16402(b)). Petitioner is represented by counsel, and
effectively abdicated his role as co-trustee to his brother. Respondent is self-represented and, in this
Court’s estimation, largely unqualified to perform the fiduciary management requirements of a trustee.
This Court appointed a limited-purpose receiver to prepare an accounting and make recommendations
for distributions and potential surcharge, if any. The Court is awaiting receipt of that report.

12/16/2025 8:24 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Probate Notes Steven S. Streger, Probate Commissioner

Department 5 December 19, 2025 8:30 am DA Case # Date Filed

5 PR12714 In Re: The Hauschildt 1994 Revocable Trust 10/09/2025

Jimmie Nixon Attorney: Michael Germain

Petition Hearing - Other

PC17200

10/09/2025 Petition File Tracking 12/05/2025 High Density

Probate Notes are not tentative rulings. Parties and counsel are expected to appear for the hearings unless this note indicates that “no appearance is
necessary.” Unless a personal appearance is required, all participants may appear via Zoom without first securing Court permission using this link:
https://tuolumne-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1615813960?pwd=NTRMT0NwMDg5cnlYdzZ6VnBXWWFsUT09. [Meeting ID: 161 581 3960; Passcode:
123456]. All matters set for hearing in Department 5 are presumptively assigned to that department for all purposes. Parties retain the right under Cal.
Const. art VI §21 to decline consent to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem. By participating in the first hearing, or electing not to attend after due
notice thereof, parties are deemed to have stipulated to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem for the entire case. See CRC 2.816.

Commissioner already serving as Judge for all purposes.

This is petition for relief and instruction relating to a parent trust (the Hauschildt 1994 Revocable Trust) and a
putative sub-trust created by amendment thereto (referred to as the “Horse-Around Ranch Trust”). This Court
shall refer to the parent trust as “Family Trust” and the sub-trust as “Ranch Sub-Trust”. This Court just received a
proposed stipulation from certain interested parties herein, purporting to resolve most of the issues presented in
the petition for relief and instructions. While this Court is certainly grateful for any proposed resolution from the
parties, and has considered the substance thereof, it is not clear to this Court that the proposed stipulation would
bind every interested party – as noted hereinafter.

Up first is the need to fill the vacancy in the Family Trust. David was the sole successor trustee of the Family Trust,
and passed away on 09/21/2025. The law provides that “if the trust instrument names the person to fill the
vacancy, the vacancy shall be filled as provided in the trust instrument.” Probate Code §15660(b). In the
original instrument, the settlors nominated Alvin, then Shari, then Wells Fargo Bank, the serve in the office of sole
successor trustee. Nineteen (19) iterations later, the surviving settlor nominated David and Mark Olson to serve
as co-trustees – with Eric Carlson serving as back-up. Although an argument can be made that Eric is only
back-up to Mark (see Art. IV.A.), Para 5 reaffirms consistent provisions from the 18 th Amendment, which had Eric
serving as back-up for either of the co-trustees. Thus, it reasonably appears that the settlor generally intended the
Family Trust to be administered by two whenever a professional was available. Have Mark Olson and Eric Carlson
declined to serve? If so, “on petition of any interested person, the court may, in its discretion, appoint a trustee to
fill the vacancy.” §15660(d). It is not clear whether Heather is an interested person (§48) if her sole interest was
David’s life estate (it does not appear that the settlor intended to give Heather her own life estate since Laram had
to survive David to inherit, not Heather). Who are the beneficiaries of the Family Trust, and why are they not
seeking appointment?

As for the Ranch Sub-Trust, the settlor directed that the assets of the trust be utilized “as a museum for public
viewing or as private assets for the private viewing of her family, for profit or not” in the trustee’s sole discretion.
The assets could be invested, or sold, in the sole discretion of the trustee. Although the settlor did not clearly
identify beneficiaries of the Ranch Sub-trust, she did provide that if the sub-trust was “unsustainable” that the
assets could be sold and the proceeds distributed 1/3 to Alvin, 1/3 to David, and 1/3 to the grandchildren. The
Family Trust did not instruct who should be the beneficiaries of the Ranch Sub-Trust, or how the trust res would be
distributed (although Art. II.D. could be read as adopting intestacy for that sub-trust). Although the settlor has
sufficiently described a reasonably ascertainable group of individuals intended to benefit from the Ranch Sub-Trust
(see §15205 and Reagh v. Kelley (1970) 10 Cal.App.3d 1082, 1088), if the sub-trust fails, the assets therein simply
get distributed via the amended Article II (which appears to have a very similar intended distribution).

12/16/2025 8:24 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Probate Notes Steven S. Streger, Probate Commissioner

Department 5 December 19, 2025 10:00 am DA Case # Date Filed

6 PR12702 Conservatorship of Avery Jones 09/22/2025

Patrick Jones Attorney: Jennifer Lothert

Melissa Jones Attorney: Jennifer Lothert

Avery Jones

Appoint Conservator

FURTHER

09/22/2025 Petition File Tracking 10/01/2025 High Density

Probate Notes are not tentative rulings. Parties and counsel are expected to appear for the hearings unless this note indicates that “no appearance is
necessary.” Unless a personal appearance is required, all participants may appear via Zoom without first securing Court permission using this link:
https://tuolumne-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1615813960?pwd=NTRMT0NwMDg5cnlYdzZ6VnBXWWFsUT09. [Meeting ID: 161 581 3960; Passcode:
123456]. All matters set for hearing in Department 5 are presumptively assigned to that department for all purposes. Parties retain the right under Cal.
Const. art VI §21 to decline consent to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem. By participating in the first hearing, or electing not to attend after due
notice thereof, parties are deemed to have stipulated to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem for the entire case. See CRC 2.816.

This is the continued hearing on a petition to establish a limited conservatorship over the person and
estate of a young male by his parents, who seek additional authority to exert power over the “seven” areas
of independence unique to limited conservatorships. The court investigator has already been appointed,

and is preparing a report for the Court. At the prior hearing, this Court engaged the proposed conservatee with his statutory rights regarding the establishment of a conservatorship. The Court was unable to determine whether counsel was needed or could be waived, and trailed the issue to this date.

12/16/2025 8:24 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Probate Notes Steven S. Streger, Probate Commissioner

Department 5 December 19, 2025 10:00 am DA Case # Date Filed

7 PR7726 Conservatorship of Melissa R. Stone 03/20/1995

Michelle J. Stone Attorney: Jennifer Lothert

Melissa R. Stone Attorney: Carrie McKernan

Richard Stone Attorney: Jennifer Lothert

Review Hearing

Accounting 17th
Review Hearing - Investigator Report - PR Code 1850

FURTHER

10/07/2022 Accounting: Other File Tracking 12/10/2024 High Density

Probate Notes are not tentative rulings. Parties and counsel are expected to appear for the hearings unless this note indicates that “no appearance is
necessary.” Unless a personal appearance is required, all participants may appear via Zoom without first securing Court permission using this link:
https://tuolumne-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1615813960?pwd=NTRMT0NwMDg5cnlYdzZ6VnBXWWFsUT09. [Meeting ID: 161 581 3960; Passcode:
123456]. All matters set for hearing in Department 5 are presumptively assigned to that department for all purposes. Parties retain the right under Cal.
Const. art VI §21 to decline consent to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem. By participating in the first hearing, or electing not to attend after due
notice thereof, parties are deemed to have stipulated to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem for the entire case. See CRC 2.816.

Commissioner already serving as Judge for all purposes.

Annual Review: The Court, having received and reviewed the investigative report, intends to find by clear
and convincing evidence that (1) the conservatee is unable to provide properly for many of her personal
needs for physical health, food, clothing, or shelter; (2) the conservatee is substantially unable to manage
any of her finances or resist undue influence; and (3) a general conservatorship of the estate is the least
restrictive alternative needed for the conservatee’s protection, taking into consideration her abilities and
capacities with current and possible supports. While a general conservatorship of the person may still
be warranted, this Court would encourage the parties look for ways to graduate the conservatee to a
limited conservatorship of the person. As the conservators, this Court has no reservations regarding
their service over the person, but notes that their service over the estate is currently the subject of a
pending objection and challenge. The Letters will be extended on an interim (six month basis).

Accounting Issue: This is a conservatorship of long-standing here in the community, in which annual
accountings have generally been approved without much scrutiny. On 04/22/2025, the co-conservators
submitted their 17th annual accounting for approval. It came the attention of this Court that the annuity
income stream has changed, necessitating a hard look at the fiduciary fees, conservator stipends,
conservatee charge-offs, and the like. As warranted by statute, this Court appointed counsel for the
conservatee to review the accounting in more detail. Appointed counsel has since filed an objection to the
accounting (§2622) on behalf of the conservatee, with additional questions presumably posed to the
conservators. Since the 16th accounting ran through 06/30/2022, and the Court approved monthly fees
through 01/09/2023, this Court intends to consider the objection reserved through 01/10/2023. It is further
noted that §2623 only allows “such compensation for services rendered by the conservator as the court
determines is just, reasonable, and in the best interest of the conservatee,” and that family is usually not
compensated for ordinary services. See CRC 7.756. Parties have requested time to resolve the
accounting concern, but mechanics of resolution must be addressed or the objection will need to be ruled
upon via the summary process.

12/16/2025 8:24 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Probate Notes Steven S. Streger, Probate Commissioner

Department 5 December 19, 2025 10:00 am DA Case # Date Filed

8 PR12276 Conservatorship of Tyler Wine 05/10/2023

Sylvia Wine Pro Per

Tyler Wine Pro Per

Raymond G. Wine Pro Per

Review Hearing - Investigator Report - PR Code 1850

05/10/2023 Petition File Tracking 12/27/2024 From Court Legal Document 5

Probate Notes are not tentative rulings. Parties and counsel are expected to appear for the hearings unless this note indicates that “no appearance is
necessary.” Unless a personal appearance is required, all participants may appear via Zoom without first securing Court permission using this link:
https://tuolumne-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1615813960?pwd=NTRMT0NwMDg5cnlYdzZ6VnBXWWFsUT09. [Meeting ID: 161 581 3960; Passcode:
123456]. All matters set for hearing in Department 5 are presumptively assigned to that department for all purposes. Parties retain the right under Cal.
Const. art VI §21 to decline consent to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem. By participating in the first hearing, or electing not to attend after due
notice thereof, parties are deemed to have stipulated to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem for the entire case. See CRC 2.816.

Commissioner already serving as Judge for all purposes.

Annual Review: This is a limited conservatorship over the person of a young man who was previously the subject of a contested proceeding. Following an evidentiary hearing in which both parents pursued competing petitions, this Court issued a written ruling granting mother’s petition with §2351.5 powers, but preserving father’s authority to have visits with the conservatee. This solution has apparently worked well for the family. This is the first full annual review. Although the investigative report is not yet on file for review, this Court will likely find by clear and convincing evidence that (1) the conservatee is unable to provide properly for many of his personal needs for physical health, food, clothing, or shelter; and (2) a limited conservatorship with additional powers is the least restrictive alternative needed for the conservatee’s protection, taking into consideration his abilities and capacities with current and possible supports. An annual review would be warranted.

12/16/2025 8:24 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Probate Notes Steven S. Streger, Probate Commissioner

Department 5 December 19, 2025 10:00 am DA Case # Date Filed

9 PR12736 Conservatorship of: Larry Richard Barr 12/03/2025

Larry Kevin Barr Pro Per

Petition Hearing - Temporary Conservatorship

12/03/2025 Petition File Tracking 12/04/2025 LP Labels Needed

Probate Notes are not tentative rulings. Parties and counsel are expected to appear for the hearings unless this note indicates that “no appearance is necessary.”
Unless a personal appearance is required, all participants may appear via Zoom without first securing Court permission using this link:
https://tuolumne-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1615813960?pwd=NTRMT0NwMDg5cnlYdzZ6VnBXWWFsUT09. [Meeting ID: 161 581 3960; Passcode: 123456].
All matters set for hearing in Department 5 are presumptively assigned to that department for all purposes. Parties retain the right under Cal. Const. art VI §21 to
decline consent to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem. By participating in the first hearing, or electing not to attend after due notice thereof, parties are
deemed to have stipulated to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem for the entire case. See CRC 2.816.

This is the initial hearing on a petition to establish a temporary (and eventual permanent) conservatorship
over the person and estate of an elderly individual who apparently now resides in Nevada. Given the size of
the estate, and the tenor/tone of the family messages attached to the petition, it would appear to this Court
that conflict will permeate. To reduce acrimony as much as possible, it is best to start on a perfect
foundation: the petition has a number of imperfections.

First, the petition identifies a co-equal kin that will likely not consent to petitioner’s nomination of himself to
serve as conservator. See Probate Code §1811(a).

Second, notice of the hearing must be provided to those persons identified in the petition, and there is no
proof of such notice in the court file. See Probate Code §§ 1260, 1822.

Third, both the petition and the citation must be properly served upon the proposed conservatee at least 15
days before the hearing, and there is no proof of that in the court file. See Probate Code §§ 1260, 1824.

Fourth, this court only has jurisdiction (1) if California is the proposed conservatee's home state, (2) if California is a “significant-connection state” and the proposed conservatee does not have a home state, or (3) if California is a “significant-connection state” and the proposed conservatee’s home state has expressly declined to exercise jurisdiction. Probate Code §1993. When did the proposed conservatee move to Nevada, and is there substantial evidence concerning the proposed conservatee still here in California? Has anyone filed for conservatorship in Nevada?

Fifth, petitioner is seeking permission to control the proposed conservatee’s medical decision-making and care, but to do so the petition must include a capacity declaration. Probate Code §1890(c).

12/16/2025 8:24 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Probate Notes Steven S. Streger, Probate Commissioner

Department 5 December 19, 2025 10:00 am DA Case # Date Filed

10 PR11471 Guardianship of Aleaya Ocanas, et al. 08/15/2017

Nancy Rogerson Pro Per

Aleaya Ocanas

Destany Ocanas

Review Hearing - Guardian Rept-Probate Code 1513.2

08/15/2017 Petition: Other File Tracking 08/15/2017 Petition 01/03/2025 High Density

Probate Notes are not tentative rulings. Parties and counsel are expected to appear for the hearings unless this note indicates that “no appearance is
necessary.” Unless a personal appearance is required, all participants may appear via Zoom without first securing Court permission using this link:
https://tuolumne-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1615813960?pwd=NTRMT0NwMDg5cnlYdzZ6VnBXWWFsUT09. [Meeting ID: 161 581 3960; Passcode:
123456]. All matters set for hearing in Department 5 are presumptively assigned to that department for all purposes. Parties retain the right under Cal.
Const. art VI §21 to decline consent to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem. By participating in the first hearing, or electing not to attend after due
notice thereof, parties are deemed to have stipulated to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem for the entire case. See CRC 2.816.

Commissioner already serving as Judge for all purposes.

This is a guardianship involving two minor children. Pursuant to Probate Code §1513.2(a), every year the
guardian shall complete and return to the court a status report (GC-251). The court clerk is required to
provide a reminder to the guardian, along with a blank GC-251, which did occur herein on 10/15/2025.
There is no report on file, which requires an appearance by the guardian.

12/16/2025 8:24 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Probate Notes Steven S. Streger, Probate Commissioner

Department 5 December 19, 2025 10:00 am DA Case # Date Filed

11 PR12170 Guardianship of Andrew Hiller 09/22/2022

Anthony Sampson Pro Per

Andrew Hiller Pro Per

Review Hearing - Guardian Rept-Probate Code 1513.2

09/22/2022 Petition File Tracking 02/03/2024 High Density

Probate Notes are not tentative rulings. Parties and counsel are expected to appear for the hearings unless this note indicates that “no appearance is
necessary.” Unless a personal appearance is required, all participants may appear via Zoom without first securing Court permission using this link:
https://tuolumne-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1615813960?pwd=NTRMT0NwMDg5cnlYdzZ6VnBXWWFsUT09. [Meeting ID: 161 581 3960; Passcode:
123456]. All matters set for hearing in Department 5 are presumptively assigned to that department for all purposes. Parties retain the right under Cal.
Const. art VI §21 to decline consent to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem. By participating in the first hearing, or electing not to attend after due
notice thereof, parties are deemed to have stipulated to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem for the entire case. See CRC 2.816.

Commissioner already serving as Judge for all purposes.

No appearance is necessary.

The Court, having received and reviewed the GC-251 with attachments, finds by a preponderance of the
evidence that the guardianship remains necessary/convenient and that the guardian continues to serve
the ward’s best interests. Court will set the annual review date.

Clerk’s office will provide notice.

12/16/2025 8:24 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Probate Notes Steven S. Streger, Probate Commissioner

Department 5 December 19, 2025 10:00 am DA Case # Date Filed

12 PR12704 Guardianship of Clemintine Lynn Garcia 09/23/2025

Wynter Garcia Pro Per

Clementine Lynn Garcia

Bernard Garcia Pro Per

Appoint Guardian

Long Term

09/23/2025 Petition File Tracking 09/23/2025 Petition 09/30/2025 High Density

Probate Notes are not tentative rulings. Parties and counsel are expected to appear for the hearings unless this note indicates that “no appearance is
necessary.” Unless a personal appearance is required, all participants may appear via Zoom without first securing Court permission using this link:
https://tuolumne-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1615813960?pwd=NTRMT0NwMDg5cnlYdzZ6VnBXWWFsUT09. [Meeting ID: 161 581 3960; Passcode:
123456]. All matters set for hearing in Department 5 are presumptively assigned to that department for all purposes. Parties retain the right under Cal.
Const. art VI §21 to decline consent to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem. By participating in the first hearing, or electing not to attend after due
notice thereof, parties are deemed to have stipulated to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem for the entire case. See CRC 2.816.

Commissioner already serving as Judge for all purposes.

This is the continued hearing on a petition to establish a guardianship over a newborn, filed by the
paternal grandparents after receiving a short-term Family Safety Plan from Calaveras County CWS.
Father consents to guardianship; Mother does not. Testimony was taken on 10/03/2025 from
representative with Calaveras County CWS and Social Services regarding the alleged mistreatment by
Mother. In order to avoid Calaveras initiating a §300 petition, the decision was made to establish the
interim guardianship with the Family Safety Plan as the backdrop, and to complete a full investigation
here. Court investigator has been appointed and report is anticipated soon.

Related to FL19312.

On 11/18/2025, paternal grandmother (guardian 1) filed a DVRO against Mother “due to mother being aggressive, making threats to kill people in our home, making threats to take [the child] and run.” Full DV-TRO granted as to petitioner and all members of household – including the ward. Evidentiary hearing was continued pending resolution of guardianship petition. DV-116 continued to this date.

Court will need to conduct hearing, send back to Dept 2 or DV-116 with return to Dept 2.

12/16/2025 8:24 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Probate Notes Steven S. Streger, Probate Commissioner

Department 5 December 19, 2025 10:00 am DA Case # Date Filed

13 PR10715 Guardianship of Connor Jacob Stacy 05/06/2011

Carole Kohler-Crowe Attorney: Jennifer Lothert

Cheryl Kohler-Crowe Attorney: Jennifer Lothert

Connor Jacob Stacy

Review Hearing - Guardian Rept-Probate Code 1513.2

05/06/2011 Petition File Tracking 01/03/2025 High Density Other Cases PR10759 FL12717

Probate Notes are not tentative rulings. Parties and counsel are expected to appear for the hearings unless this note indicates that “no appearance is
necessary.” Unless a personal appearance is required, all participants may appear via Zoom without first securing Court permission using this link:
https://tuolumne-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1615813960?pwd=NTRMT0NwMDg5cnlYdzZ6VnBXWWFsUT09. [Meeting ID: 161 581 3960; Passcode:
123456]. All matters set for hearing in Department 5 are presumptively assigned to that department for all purposes. Parties retain the right under Cal.
Const. art VI §21 to decline consent to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem. By participating in the first hearing, or electing not to attend after due
notice thereof, parties are deemed to have stipulated to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem for the entire case. See CRC 2.816.

Commissioner already serving as Judge for all purposes.

This is a guardianship involving one minor child (though part of a much larger probate family). Pursuant
to Probate Code §1513.2(a), every year the guardian shall complete and return to the court a status report
(GC-251). The court clerk is required to provide a reminder to the guardian, along with a blank GC-251,
which did occur herein on 10/15/2025. There is no report on file, which requires an appearance by the
guardian.

12/16/2025 8:24 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Probate Notes Steven S. Streger, Probate Commissioner

Department 5 December 19, 2025 10:00 am DA Case # Date Filed

14 PR12445 Guardianship of Haliann Vazquez, et. al. 04/08/2024

Trudy Reynosa Pro Per

Haliann Vazquez

Izabel Vazquez

Joe Reynosa Pro Per

Review Hearing - Guardian Rept-Probate Code 1513.2

FURTHER

04/08/2024 Petition File Tracking 08/06/2024 High Density

Probate Notes are not tentative rulings. Parties and counsel are expected to appear for the hearings unless this note indicates that “no appearance is
necessary.” Unless a personal appearance is required, all participants may appear via Zoom without first securing Court permission using this link:
https://tuolumne-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1615813960?pwd=NTRMT0NwMDg5cnlYdzZ6VnBXWWFsUT09. [Meeting ID: 161 581 3960; Passcode:
123456]. All matters set for hearing in Department 5 are presumptively assigned to that department for all purposes. Parties retain the right under Cal.
Const. art VI §21 to decline consent to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem. By participating in the first hearing, or electing not to attend after due
notice thereof, parties are deemed to have stipulated to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem for the entire case. See CRC 2.816.

Commissioner already serving as Judge for all purposes.

This is a guardianship involving co-guardians and two minor children. Pursuant to Probate Code
§1513.2(a), every year the guardian shall complete and return to the court a status report (GC-251). The
court clerk is required to provide a reminder to the guardian, along with a blank GC-251, which did occur
herein on 06/03/2025. There is no report on file, which requires an appearance by the guardian. The
guardians missed one hearing due to a medical issue, but to date have not complied with no explanation
provided to this Court. Pursuant to §1513.2(a), “if the court is unable to obtain this information within 30
days after the date the status report is due, the court shall either order the guardian to make himself or
herself available to the investigator for purposes of investigation of the guardianship, or to show cause
why the guardian should not be removed.” Pursuant to §1513.1(a), “the court may order reimbursement
to the court or to the county in the amount of the assessment, unless the court finds that all or any part of
the assessment would impose a hardship on the ward or the ward's estate.” In other words,
investigative costs may be payable by the parents if compliance is not forthcoming.

12/16/2025 8:24 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Probate Notes Steven S. Streger, Probate Commissioner

Department 5 December 19, 2025 10:00 am DA Case # Date Filed

15 PR12699 Guardianship Of Ivy Rose Griffin, et. al 09/17/2025

Rosemary Griffin Pro Per

Appoint Guardian

Long Term

09/17/2025 Petition File Tracking 09/19/2025 High Density

Probate Notes are not tentative rulings. Parties and counsel are expected to appear for the hearings unless this note indicates that “no appearance is
necessary.” Unless a personal appearance is required, all participants may appear via Zoom without first securing Court permission using this link:
https://tuolumne-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1615813960?pwd=NTRMT0NwMDg5cnlYdzZ6VnBXWWFsUT09. [Meeting ID: 161 581 3960; Passcode:
123456]. All matters set for hearing in Department 5 are presumptively assigned to that department for all purposes. Parties retain the right under Cal.
Const. art VI §21 to decline consent to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem. By participating in the first hearing, or electing not to attend after due
notice thereof, parties are deemed to have stipulated to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem for the entire case. See CRC 2.816.

Commissioner already serving as Judge for all purposes.

This is the continued hearing on the maternal grandmother’s petition to establish a guardianship for two
young children – with the consent of the biological mother. According to petitioner, the proposed wards
have been residing with her for two months, and that the biological father is presently unfit to parent. The
court investigator has been appointed, and is working her way through the backgrounds. Biological father
objects to the guardianship. Father lives in Alameda County. Maternal grandmother resides in Groveland
with children. Father apparently has full legal and full physical custody of children via a custody case in
Alameda County – which this Court has requested Father provide copies of. Petitioner informs the
Court that a CPS worker in Alameda County instructed her to apply for guardianship here in Tuolumne
County. Jurisdiction to be decided. Still awaiting court investigator report.

12/16/2025 8:24 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Probate Notes Steven S. Streger, Probate Commissioner

Department 5 December 19, 2025 10:00 am DA Case # Date Filed

16 PR11221 Guardianship of Kayleigh R. James, et al 08/28/2015

Troy Stanley Pro Per

Jennifer Powers Pro Per

Kayleigh R James

Aubrey A Willis

Michael James Pro Per

Review Hearing - Guardian Rept-Probate Code 1513.2

08/28/2015 Petition: Other File Tracking 08/28/2015 Petition 12/12/2023 High Density

Probate Notes are not tentative rulings. Parties and counsel are expected to appear for the hearings unless this note indicates that “no appearance is
necessary.” Unless a personal appearance is required, all participants may appear via Zoom without first securing Court permission using this link:
https://tuolumne-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1615813960?pwd=NTRMT0NwMDg5cnlYdzZ6VnBXWWFsUT09. [Meeting ID: 161 581 3960; Passcode:
123456]. All matters set for hearing in Department 5 are presumptively assigned to that department for all purposes. Parties retain the right under Cal.
Const. art VI §21 to decline consent to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem. By participating in the first hearing, or electing not to attend after due
notice thereof, parties are deemed to have stipulated to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem for the entire case. See CRC 2.816.

Commissioner already serving as Judge for all purposes.

No appearance is necessary.

The Court, having received and reviewed the GC-251 with attachments for both wards, finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the guardianship remains necessary/convenient and that the guardians continue to serve the wards’ best interests. Court will set the annual review date.

Clerk’s office will provide notice.

12/16/2025 8:24 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Probate Notes Steven S. Streger, Probate Commissioner

Department 5 December 19, 2025 10:00 am DA Case # Date Filed

17 PR12730 Guardianship of Kendra Lynn Taylor 11/07/2025

Tina Terradista Pro Per

Kendra Lynn Taylor Pro Per

Appoint Guardian

FURTHER

11/07/2025 Petition File Tracking 11/14/2025 High Density

Probate Notes are not tentative rulings. Parties and counsel are expected to appear for the hearings unless this note indicates that “no appearance is
necessary.” Unless a personal appearance is required, all participants may appear via Zoom without first securing Court permission using this link:
https://tuolumne-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1615813960?pwd=NTRMT0NwMDg5cnlYdzZ6VnBXWWFsUT09. [Meeting ID: 161 581 3960; Passcode:
123456]. All matters set for hearing in Department 5 are presumptively assigned to that department for all purposes. Parties retain the right under Cal.
Const. art VI §21 to decline consent to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem. By participating in the first hearing, or electing not to attend after due
notice thereof, parties are deemed to have stipulated to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem for the entire case. See CRC 2.816.

Commissioner already serving as Judge for all purposes.

This is a petition to establish a guardianship, filed by a family friend. There is no proof of having given
notice to either biological parent, or any family member within the second degree. Petitioner advised
at the prior hearing that she has had trouble giving the required notice. Petitioner advises that there
was a prior guardianship (PR11259), which is still active and has a review date set for 03/20/2026. The
appropriate process here is to have PR12730 dismissed and to treat the new petition as a petition to
substitute in as successor guardian following a vacancy in that position pursuant to Probate Code
§2670. Although a nonrelative guardianship has additional requirements (see §1541), the Department
of Social Services has yet to complete an investigation in this case and the court’s own investigator is
more than capable of handling a succession guardian application.

All filings in PR12730 shall be transferred over to PR11259. PR12730 shall be dismissed. All future
filings shall bear the case number PR11259.

12/16/2025 8:24 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Probate Notes Steven S. Streger, Probate Commissioner

Department 5 December 19, 2025 10:00 am DA Case # Date Filed

18 PR11482 Guardianship of Reanna McLoughlin and Griffin McLoughlin 09/12/2017

Reanna Lillie McLoughlin

Griffin Wayne McLoughlin

Alicia Marie Henderson Attorney: Danny Cochetas

Randolph Clinton Henderson Attorney: Danny Cochetas

Review Hearing - Guardian Rept-Probate Code 1513.2

09/12/2017 Petition: Other File Tracking 09/12/2017 Petition 11/19/2024 Civil Calendar

Probate Notes are not tentative rulings. Parties and counsel are expected to appear for the hearings unless this note indicates that “no appearance is
necessary.” Unless a personal appearance is required, all participants may appear via Zoom without first securing Court permission using this link:
https://tuolumne-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1615813960?pwd=NTRMT0NwMDg5cnlYdzZ6VnBXWWFsUT09. [Meeting ID: 161 581 3960; Passcode:
123456]. All matters set for hearing in Department 5 are presumptively assigned to that department for all purposes. Parties retain the right under Cal.
Const. art VI §21 to decline consent to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem. By participating in the first hearing, or electing not to attend after due
notice thereof, parties are deemed to have stipulated to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem for the entire case. See CRC 2.816.

Commissioner already serving as Judge for all purposes.

No appearance is necessary.

The Court, having received and reviewed the GC-251 with attachments for both wards, finds by a
preponderance of the evidence that the guardianship remains necessary/convenient and that the
guardians continue to serve the wards’ best interests. Court will set the annual review date.

Clerk’s office will provide notice.

P.S. The wards have achieved some fairly stellar academic marks. The Court looks forward to their
final guardianship hearing next year before aging out.

12/16/2025 8:24 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Probate Notes Steven S. Streger, Probate Commissioner

Department 5 December 19, 2025 10:00 am DA Case # Date Filed

19 PR10759 Guardianship of Sarah J. Kohler-Crowe 09/13/2011

Carole Kohler-Crowe Attorney: Jennifer Lothert

Cheryl Kohler-Crowe Attorney: Jennifer Lothert

Sarah Jane Kohler-Crowe

Review Hearing - Guardian Rept-Probate Code 1513.2

12/11/2013 Petition: Other File Tracking 01/03/2025 High Density Other Cases PR10715 FL12716 CV58922

Probate Notes are not tentative rulings. Parties and counsel are expected to appear for the hearings unless this note indicates that “no appearance is
necessary.” Unless a personal appearance is required, all participants may appear via Zoom without first securing Court permission using this link:
https://tuolumne-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1615813960?pwd=NTRMT0NwMDg5cnlYdzZ6VnBXWWFsUT09. [Meeting ID: 161 581 3960; Passcode:
123456]. All matters set for hearing in Department 5 are presumptively assigned to that department for all purposes. Parties retain the right under Cal.
Const. art VI §21 to decline consent to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem. By participating in the first hearing, or electing not to attend after due
notice thereof, parties are deemed to have stipulated to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem for the entire case. See CRC 2.816.

Commissioner already serving as Judge for all purposes.

This is a guardianship involving one minor child (though part of a much larger probate family). Pursuant
to Probate Code §1513.2(a), every year the guardian shall complete and return to the court a status
report (GC-251). The court clerk is required to provide a reminder to the guardian, along with a blank
GC-251, which did occur herein on 10/15/2025. There is no report on file, which requires an
appearance by the guardian.

12/16/2025 8:24 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Probate Notes Steven S. Streger, Probate Commissioner

Department 5 December 19, 2025 1:30 pm DA Case # Date Filed

20 FL13784 County of Tuolumne vs. Tiffany S. 2-1669123 09/23/2015

County of Tuolumne Attorney: Dept. of Child
Support Services
Tiffany S.

James W.

Review Hearing

Post Mediation Stip

09/23/2015 Complaint File Tracking 08/07/2025 Commissioner Streger

Parties and counsel are expected to appear for the hearings unless this note indicates that “no appearance is necessary.” All participants may appear via
Zoom: https://tuolumne-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1615813960?pwd=NTRMT0NwMDg5cnlYdzZ6VnBXWWFsUT09. [Meeting ID: 161 581 3960;
Passcode: 123456]. All matters set for hearing in Department 5 are presumptively assigned to that department for all purposes. Parties retain the right
under Cal. Const. art VI §21 to decline consent to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem. By participating in the first hearing, or electing not to attend
after due notice thereof, parties are deemed to have stipulated to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem for the entire case. See CRC 2.816.

Commissioner already serving as Judge for all purposes.

Confidential parentage proceeding. Court prepared stipulated judgment for the parties. Awaiting
return of the package and appearance by the parties for voir dire.

12/16/2025 8:24 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Probate Notes Steven S. Streger, Probate Commissioner

Department 5 December 19, 2025 1:30 pm DA Case # Date Filed

21 FL18879 Austin Frederick and Nariah Frederick 12/16/2024

Austin Frederick Attorney: Hal Channell

Nariah Frederick Pro Per

Hearing: Other - Sever/Bifurcate

Dissolution /Judgment

12/16/2024 Complaint File Tracking 09/02/2025 High Density Other Cases FL18856

Parties and counsel are expected to appear for the hearings unless this note indicates that “no appearance is necessary.” All participants may appear via
Zoom: https://tuolumne-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1615813960?pwd=NTRMT0NwMDg5cnlYdzZ6VnBXWWFsUT09. [Meeting ID: 161 581 3960;
Passcode: 123456]. All matters set for hearing in Department 5 are presumptively assigned to that department for all purposes. Parties retain the right
under Cal. Const. art VI §21 to decline consent to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem. By participating in the first hearing, or electing not to attend
after due notice thereof, parties are deemed to have stipulated to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem for the entire case. See CRC 2.816.

Commissioner already serving as Judge for all purposes.

On 11/26/2024, Mother filed a DVRO in the related action (FL18856). Mother called the police that evening and secured an EPO. The DV-TRO was granted, and included protection for the minor child they share. The DV-140 itself was left blank.

On 12/16/2024, Father filed a petition to dissolve their very brief (22 month) marriage. The child was conceived prior, but born within, wedlock. Father works in pest control, earning $4,160/month. Mother works only part-time at Columbia College as a student teacher.

On 03/13/2025, the Court (JHGC) awarded Father facetime with the minor child every Mon/Fri at 5pm not to exceed 15 min (the child is not yet 2 yrs old). Father failed to appear for the scheduled mediation. That same day, Father pled guilty in CRF76084 to a reduced 273.5.

On 03/28/2025, the Court (JHGC) awarded Father supervised 2-hr blocks of time with the child, up to 3x/week.

On 05/12/2025, the parties appeared in department 2 for a two-day trial on the DVRO and related visitation concerns. Following the trial, Mother was awarded a 5-year DVRO (no contact, stay away) with a complete DV-140, giving her sole legal and sole physical custody of the minor child. Father was given supervised visits “as can be arranged.”

Order from 08/06/2025 suggests that custody and visitation were not intended to be permanent orders, but the DV-140 did not include any carve-outs for parenting time.

Parties to advise what remains of the case and how best this Department can assist in getting the parties over the finish line.

12/16/2025 8:24 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Probate Notes Steven S. Streger, Probate Commissioner

Department 5 December 19, 2025 1:30 pm DA Case # Date Filed

22 FL18515 Teresa Garduno Ramirez vs. Fernando Medrano-Tinoco 03/28/2024

Teresa Garduno Ramirez Pro Per

Fernando Medrano-Tinoco

Review Hearing

Special Set - Resp. Schedule

03/28/2024 Petition File Tracking 03/29/2024 High Density

Parties and counsel are expected to appear for the hearings unless this note indicates that “no appearance is necessary.” All participants may appear via
Zoom: https://tuolumne-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1615813960?pwd=NTRMT0NwMDg5cnlYdzZ6VnBXWWFsUT09. [Meeting ID: 161 581 3960; Passcode:
123456]. All matters set for hearing in Department 5 are presumptively assigned to that department for all purposes. Parties retain the right under Cal.
Const. art VI §21 to decline consent to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem. By participating in the first hearing, or electing not to attend after due
notice thereof, parties are deemed to have stipulated to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem for the entire case. See CRC 2.816.

Commissioner already serving as Judge for all purposes.

Review hearing to determine if visits have gone well based on stipulated agreement.

Mother’s RFO to change the agreement, filed the same day agreement was reached, was dropped after
she failed to appear at the last hearing.

12/16/2025 8:24 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Probate Notes Steven S. Streger, Probate Commissioner

Department 5 December 19, 2025 1:30 pm DA Case # Date Filed

23 CV67204 Wayne Russo vs. Robert Patrick et al 04/25/2025

Wayne Russo Pro Per

Robert Patrick

Mary Helus

Default Hearing

Prove-Up

04/25/2025 Complaint File Tracking 07/09/2025 High Density

Parties and counsel are expected to appear for the hearings unless this note indicates that “no appearance is necessary.” All participants may appear via
Zoom: https://tuolumne-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1615813960?pwd=NTRMT0NwMDg5cnlYdzZ6VnBXWWFsUT09. [Meeting ID: 161 581 3960; Passcode:
123456]. All matters set for hearing in Department 5 are presumptively assigned to that department for all purposes. Parties retain the right under Cal.
Const. art VI §21 to decline consent to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem. By participating in the first hearing, or electing not to attend after due
notice thereof, parties are deemed to have stipulated to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem for the entire case. See CRC 2.816.

Commissioner already serving as Judge for all purposes.

Court was expecting new default prove-up package in light of plaintiff’s election to file first amended
complaint after taking defendant’s earlier default. There is nothing on file.

12/16/2025 8:24 am