Trusts and Estates
Ca. Trs. & Estates Quarterly Volume 15, Issue 2, Summer 2009
Content
- California's New Pet Trust Statute: Maybe the Legislature Will Get It Right Eventually
- Drafting No Contest Clauses Under the New Law
- Estate Planning For Registered Domestic Partners: Navigating the State and Federal Conflict
- Ode To the Estate Tax—Repeal?
- Running Away Will Get You Nowhere: New Taxes Imposed On Expatriates
- Why Federal Jurisdiction Matters: the Impact of Marshall V. Marshall On Probate Court Litigation
WHY FEDERAL JURISDICTION MATTERS: THE IMPACT OF MARSHALL V. MARSHALL ON PROBATE COURT LITIGATION
By Daryl M. Crone*
I. INTRODUCTION
Unbeknownst to many practitioners, actions typically litigated in state probate court are potentially subject to federal court jurisdiction. As the U.S. Supreme Court clarified in 2006, the so-called "probate exception" to federal court jurisdiction extends only to the core, traditional province of the probate court, e.g., probating a will. Beyond that, the ordinary bases for asserting federal court jurisdiction apply to probate-related matters, so long as the assertion of federal jurisdiction does not unduly disturb a previous assertion by the probate court of jurisdiction over the subject property.
This is true even when proceedings originate in the probate court. A defendant facing an adversary action in probate courtâsuch as a petition under section 850 of the Probate Code seeking the return of alleged estate propertyâis entitled to remove the action to federal court provided that other jurisdictional prerequisites are satisfied. Practitioners should be aware of this possibility, and that trust and estate disputes may sometimes be brought or end up in a federal forum.