Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

Estate of Ben-Ali

216 Cal.App.4th 1026, 157 Cal. Rptr. 3d 353 (2013)

Case BriefRelatedOptions
From our private database of 33,600+ case briefs...

Estate of Ben-Ali

California Court of Appeal

216 Cal.App.4th 1026, 157 Cal. Rptr. 3d 353 (2013)

Facts

Hassan Ben-Ali had two children, D’Artagnan Lloyd and Taruk Ben-Ali, with two different mothers. Hassan owned an apartment building, and in 1993, transferred the building to Taruk, potentially to avoid losing the building to the IRS. After the transfer, Hassan continued to manage the building as he had before the transfer. In 2002, Taruk married Wendelyn Wilburn. In 2004, Taruk disappeared. In 2008, it was revealed that Taruk had died of a drug overdose in 2004, but that Hassan had concealed the death, even from Wilburn, potentially to maintain control of the apartment building. Hassan had forged Taruk’s signature on documents related to the building after his death. Later in 2008, Hassan committed suicide. Among Hassan’s possessions was Taruk’s purported will. The will left Taruk’s personal property to Wilburn and left all other assets, including the apartment building, to Hassan. The will named Hassan as the executor of Taruk’s estate. The will was signed by two witnesses, “Wendy Ben-Ali” and a second name that was illegible. Wilburn denied signing the will. Wilburn petitioned the probate court for appointment and for letters of administration. Lloyd also petitioned for appointment and for probate of the will. The probate court found Wilburn’s testimony unreliable, found her signature on the will to be authentic, and imputed that authenticity to the other, illegible signature. Consequently, the court denied Wilburn’s petition to contest the will, and granted Lloyd’s petition for probate of the will. Wilburn appealed, arguing that the will was invalidly executed and, as a result, that she was entitled to all of Taruk’s assets via intestate succession.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Margulies, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 602,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 602,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 33,600 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 602,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 33,600 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership