In trust and estate litigation, clarity around notice, standing, and the effect of default is critical—especially when charitable beneficiaries are involved. The California Court of Appeal’s decision in Breslin v. Breslin (2021) 62 Cal.App.5th 801 has reshaped how courts treat parties who receive notice but fail to participate in mediations set by the court. For practitioners, it serves as a guiding case. For our firm, Trust Law Partners, it has helped our firm secure successful outcomes for disinherited beneficiaries wrongly excluded from multimillion-dollar estates.
The Breslin Framework: A Quick Overview
In Breslin v. Breslin, the Court of Appeal ruled that a party who receives proper notice of a court-ordered mediation and then fails to appear and participate in mediation and the resulting settlement is bound by the outcome—even if it results in a complete loss of their interest in the trust. There, charitable beneficiaries were disinherited by a trust amendment. They received notice of a petition to invalidate that amendment and a subsequent Notice of Mediation but opted not to appear. When those non-participating charities cried foul because their interest in the trust was lost, the court told effectively told them “Too bad.”
The appellate court rejected their claim. Because they had received proper notice and an opportunity to participate in the earlier proceedings, did not object to mediation ordered by the court, and chose not to participate despite being given an opportunity to do so, their rights were extinguished by their failure to act.
Representing Disinherited Charities
Trust Law Partners has used the power of the Breslin case to achieve successful results for some or our clients. The Breslin case does not only apply to charities, but it also applies to any potential interested party that does not appear at a mediation where the proper Breslin notice has been issued. This means, individuals, companies, charities, and any other conceivable party can have its potential interest extinguished by failing to participate when the court issues a Breslin ruling and proper notice is given.
Lessons for Practitioners
For estate litigators, the practical impact of this case cannot be overstated. Whether representing a disinherited party or petitioning on behalf of a current beneficiary, Breslin provides clear rules of engagement:
- If your client receives notice of a trust proceeding, do not delay. Failure to respond, object, or participate may potentially result in waiver of all rights.
- Representing charitable institutions comes with added complexity. These organizations often operate slowly and with committee-based decision-making. Prompt legal guidance is essential.
- If your client receives notice of mediation, make sure either a representative or counsel appears to stake their claim.
Final Thoughts: Silence is costly
Breslin v. Breslin serves as both a warning and a framework. In some of our cases, it helped ensure fairness for the beneficiaries that stepped forward and stood their ground and asserted their legal rights under Breslin. For trust and estate litigators, the message is simple: silence is not neutral. Silence is costly.
If you’re handling a contested trust matter involving disinherited beneficiaries, make sure your clients understand the stakes. Participation is no longer optional—it’s essential.
Trust Law Partners, LLP specializes in representing beneficiaries and heirs in complex trust litigation. We welcome co-counsel partnerships and referrals.
Call 833-878-7852 to discuss your case with our team.