One such factor is the “nature” of the action. If it concerns the “internal affairs” of a trust, then specific venue rules come into play. But making this determination isn’t easy. And filing suit in the wrong county could result in both a transfer and sanctions for the plaintiff who didn’t do their homework.
What is Venue?
Venue is the often-overlooked sister to fundamental jurisdiction. And perhaps because the two concepts are so related, there is a level of “confusion” which permeates the discussion of these doctrines in concert. (Capra v. Capra (2020) 58 Cal.App.5th 1072, 1082.)
In the eyes of many lawyers, venue is often a secondary consideration to jurisdiction because jurisdiction is one of the most important aspects of any lawsuit. Fundamentally, jurisdiction refers to a court’s authority to try the case before it. (Harnedy v. Whitty (2003) 110 Cal.App.4th 1333, 1334.) If a court lacks jurisdiction over a case, then any judgment, order, or ruling it issues is void as a matter of law.
Usually, jurisdiction issues pop up when you have parties in different states. If “Drake” lives in Arizona, and his business partner, “Josh,” sues him in California, the jurisdictional question is whether California courts have the ability and authority to hear the case. This question is then resolved through a robust and dense minimum contacts analysis, the subject of which is a mainstay of civil procedure courses across every law school in the country.
But what if jurisdiction is not a problem? Unless someone’s suing an out-of-state defendant (or filing a special suit invoking exclusive federal jurisdiction), this is usually the case for California residents. Both parties live in California, so the state undoubtedly has jurisdiction over the action.
This is where venue comes in. Unlike jurisdiction, which is assessed on a state-wide level, venue refers to the proper county or district within the state where the lawsuit will be filed. Put simply, when a lawsuit is filed, there is a correct county (or counties) where the action can take place. Finding the right county will depend on a number of statutes and legal doctrines governing this point of law. (Battaglia Enterprises, Inc. v. Superior Court (2013) 215 Cal.App.4th 309, 313.)
What Statutes Govern Venue for Trusts?
The correct venue for a lawsuit is dependent on a number of factors. But the most important is the “nature” of the lawsuit. For example, if a lawsuit involves real property, then the proper county for the suit is the county where the property is located. (CCP § 392.)
Like actions concerning real property, lawsuits involving trusts have their own special venue statute.
Under Probate Code section 17005, “the proper county for commencement of a proceeding pursuant to this division is either of the following: (1) In the case of a living trust, the county where the principal place of administration of the trust is located. (2) In the case of a testamentary trust, either the county where the decedent’s estate is administered or where the principal place of administration of the trust is located. (b) If a living trust has no trustee, the property county for commencement of a proceeding for appointing a trustee is the county where the trust property, or some portion of the trust property, is located. (c) Except as otherwise provided in subdivisions (a) and (b), the proper county for commencement of a proceeding pursuant to this division is determined by the rules applicable to civil actions generally.”
One might ask why the Probate Code would be the place to find this provision. If no one has passed away, why would probate ever be involved? The answer is that the probate court has exclusive jurisdiction over proceedings concerning the “internal affairs” of inter vivos trusts, even when the property is administered outside of probate. (Prob. Code § 17000.)
What counts as “internal affairs?” The answer is incredibly long but can be found in its entirety under Probate Code section 17200. A few examples include determining questions of construction within the trust instrument (Id. (b)(1)), compelling a trustee to provide information about the trust (Id. (b)(7)(B)), and determining the liability of the trust for any debts of a deceased settlor (Id. (b)(20)).
When Does a Cause of Action Concern a Trust?
While there may be a host of statutes governing venue and venue for trust actions specifically, calculating the right county for a lawsuit may still be a confusing endeavor. For instance, suppose a lawsuit concerns a piece of real property within an inter vivos trust.
There isn’t a simple answer here. Under Capra, if an action “is one over land,” then venue is proper where the property is located, but if the action is “challenging the internal affairs of a trust,” then the proper county is the principal place of the trust’s administration. (Capra, 58 Cal.App.5th at 1086.)
But when is an action “over land” versus concerning “internal affairs?” That’s a question best left to an attorney and will depend on the specific facts of the case. But it’s safe to speculate that not every action involving a trust property will result in a headache over venue.
If a trustee sues a contingent beneficiary for trespass, it’s probably an action over land. But if a trustee files a partition lawsuit, where the right to do so depends on the validity of certain trust provisions, the answer becomes less clear.
How can Attorneys at the Underwood Law Firm Assist You?
Lawsuits involving trusts can already be incredibly complex. Adding issues of venue only further complicates matters for the inexperienced litigant. In these situations, the right attorney can make all the difference.
At the Underwood Law Firm, our knowledgeable attorneys are here to help. If you are attempting to file a petition concerning the property in trust, wondering whether you can partition the property in probate court, or if you just have questions, please do not hesitate to contact our office.
Learn more here.