Blog - Vacaville Attorney

How Do You Get a California Emergency Custody Order?

How Do You Get a California Emergency Custody Order? In our previous post, When Can You Get a California Emergency Custody Order?, we discussed the circumstances that may justify emergency court intervention. This post turns to the next question: what does a parent actually need to do to request an emergency custody order? A parent generally must have or start a family-law case, file the correct forms, provide specific facts and supporting evidence, comply with notice requirements, and explain why the issue cannot wait for a regular hearing.

The emergency custody process recently received public attention when Dancing with the Stars professional Gleb Savchenko sought temporary sole custody of his 15-year-old daughter. According to news reports on Gleb Savchenko’s emergency custody filing, Savchenko alleged that his former wife, Elena Samodanova, had kept their daughters in Hong Kong beyond what he understood to be a temporary arrangement. Samodanova disputes his claims, maintains that Hong Kong is the child’s permanent home, and challenges California’s jurisdiction.

The court will decide the facts and legal issues in that case. However, the dispute illustrates why emergency custody applications can involve several questions at once, including where the child lives, which court has jurisdiction, what existing orders provide, and whether there is a genuine need for immediate relief.

Start or Use an Existing Family-Law Case

A parent requests emergency custody orders within a family-law case. That case might involve:

Divorce
Legal separation
Parentage
Domestic violence
An existing child custody dispute

A parent who does not already have an open case may need to start one before asking for emergency relief. The California Courts Self-Help Guide to emergency ex parte orders explains that the emergency request is filed using the existing family-law case number.

Jurisdiction can be especially complicated when:

A child has recently moved to or from California
The parents live in different states
The child has lived outside California
The child is currently in another country
Another state or country has already issued custody orders

A California court must have authority to make the requested custody order.

Prepare the Required Forms

The forms required may vary depending on the case and the local court, but commonly include:

Request for Order, Form FL-300, which identifies the orders being requested
Temporary Emergency Orders, Form FL-305, which contains the proposed temporary orders
Declaration Under Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act, Form FL-105, which provides the child’s residence and custody history
Declaration Regarding Notice and Service, Form FL-303, which explains what notice was provided

Some courts also require local forms or additional copies. Parents should review the requirements of the particular superior court where the case is pending.

How Do You Get a California Emergency Custody Order?

The written declaration is one of the most important parts of the application. As discussed in our previous post about when a California emergency custody order may be available, the court generally needs more than a parent’s belief that the situation is urgent. The requesting parent should provide specific facts showing why immediate action is necessary.

The declaration should explain:

What happened
When it happened
Where it occurred
Who was involved
How the parent knows the information
Whether similar incidents have happened before
What harm is likely to occur
Why the matter cannot wait for a normal hearing
What specific temporary orders are requested

Supporting documents may also help establish why immediate court intervention is necessary. Depending on the circumstances, those documents might include:

Police or incident reports
Medical or counseling records
Travel itineraries or airline reservations
School or childcare records
Emails or text messages
Photographs
Existing custody orders
Witness declarations

The goal is to give the judge enough specific information to understand both the nature of the alleged emergency and why waiting for a regularly scheduled hearing could put the child at risk.

Give Notice to the Other Parent

Emergency applications usually require advance notice to the other parent or that parent’s attorney. The notice period is shorter than it would be for an ordinary Request for Order, but the requesting parent generally must state when and how notice was provided.

The notice may need to identify:

The date and time the emergency request will be presented
The court where the request will be made
The nature of the orders being requested
How the other parent can respond or appear

There are limited circumstances in which a court may excuse notice. For example, notice may be waived when providing it could create an immediate danger, lead to the child being removed, or frustrate the purpose of the requested order. The governing requirements are described in California Rule of Court 5.151 governing temporary emergency orders, along with related rules concerning notice and service.

What Happens After the Request Is Filed?

The judge may review the written application without conducting a full evidentiary hearing. Depending on the circumstances, the court may:

Grant all of the requested emergency orders
Grant only some of the requested orders
Modify the proposed orders
Deny the emergency request
Set the matter for a prompt hearing
Request additional information or documentation

If temporary emergency orders are issued, the requesting parent must arrange for the other parent to be properly served. The order generally remains temporary until the scheduled hearing unless the court extends or replaces it.

What Happens at the Later Hearing?

At the noticed hearing, both parents can present their positions. Depending on the evidence and circumstances, the judge may:

Continue the emergency orders
Modify the temporary custody arrangement
Terminate the emergency orders
Establish or modify visitation
Impose conditions intended to protect the child
Make other temporary custody and visitation orders

Because the procedure moves quickly, incomplete forms, weak declarations, notice problems, or filing in the wrong court can delay or undermine an otherwise serious request.

If you are facing an urgent child custody situation, you do not have to navigate the emergency court process alone. The Law Offices of David W. Knecht represents California parents in child custody and other family law matters. Call 707-451-4502 to schedule a consultation and discuss the legal options available for protecting your child and your parental rights.

Filed Under: Divorce Attorney, Divorce Lawyer, Fairfield Attorney, Fairfield Lawyer, Family Law, Vacaville Attorney, Vacaville Lawyer

When Can You Get a California Emergency Custody Order?

When Can You Get a California Emergency Custody Order? Generally, emergency relief may be available when a child faces immediate harm or an immediate risk of being removed from the state. A recent custody dispute involving Dancing with the Stars professional Gleb Savchenko illustrates the type of urgent and complicated circumstances that can lead a parent to seek emergency relief.

According to People’s coverage of Gleb Savchenko’s emergency custody request, Savchenko requested temporary sole legal and physical custody of his 15-year-old daughter. He alleged that his former wife, Elena Samodanova, had kept their daughters in Hong Kong beyond what he understood to be a temporary relocation. He also expressed concern that returning their older daughter to Hong Kong could result in international wrongful retention or abduction. Samodanova disputes his allegations, maintains that Hong Kong is the child’s permanent home, and challenges California’s jurisdiction.

The court will determine the facts and legal issues in that case. Nevertheless, the dispute highlights an important question for California parents: what circumstances are serious enough to justify immediate court intervention?

What Is an Emergency Custody Order?

An emergency custody order is a temporary order issued on an expedited basis before the court can hold a regularly scheduled hearing. These requests are sometimes called ex parte requests because the judge may initially consider the requesting parent’s application without conducting a full hearing involving both parties.

Emergency orders are not intended to resolve ordinary parenting disagreements or give one parent an advantage in a custody dispute. They are reserved for situations in which waiting for a regular hearing could expose a child to immediate danger or allow the child to be taken from California.

The California Courts Self-Help Guide to emergency ex parte orders explains that an emergency may involve irreparable harm, an immediate risk that a child will be taken from California, or loss or damage to property.

When Can You Get a California Emergency Custody Order?

Under California Family Code section 3064, a court generally must refrain from granting or modifying custody on an ex parte basis unless there is a showing of:

Immediate harm to the child
An immediate risk that the child will be removed from California

Immediate harm can include recent acts of domestic violence, an ongoing pattern of domestic violence, or recent or continuing sexual abuse of the child. Courts may also consider a parent’s illegal access to firearms and ammunition when evaluating whether a child is in immediate danger.

Other circumstances that may support an emergency request include:

Credible threats to harm the child
Serious physical abuse or neglect
Dangerous substance use that impairs a parent’s ability to care for the child
Plans to take the child out of California without authorization
A genuine risk of international child abduction or wrongful retention
An urgent situation in which waiting for a normal hearing could cause irreparable harm

A parent’s fear or suspicion alone may not be enough. The court generally needs specific facts showing why immediate action is necessary.

What Evidence Can Support the Request?

California courts instruct parents to provide facts rather than conclusions or opinions. A declaration should explain what occurred, when it occurred, how the parent knows about it, and what immediate harm is likely to happen without a court order.

Helpful supporting materials may include:

Police or incident reports
Medical or counseling records
Text messages, emails, or voicemails
Travel plans or airline reservations
School or childcare records
Photographs
Existing custody orders
Signed witness declarations

The requirements for family-law emergency applications are set out in California Rule of Court 5.151 governing temporary emergency orders. Local courts may impose additional procedural requirements.

Emergency Orders Are Temporary

An emergency order does not necessarily determine permanent custody. If emergency relief is granted, the court will ordinarily schedule a hearing at which both parents can present evidence and arguments. The judge may then continue, modify, or terminate the temporary order.

The Law Office of David Knecht represents California parents in child custody matters, including cases involving urgent requests for court intervention. Contact our office at (707) 451-4502 to discuss your circumstances and the legal options that may be available.

Filed Under: Divorce Attorney, Divorce Lawyer, Fairfield Attorney, Fairfield Lawyer, Family Law, Vacaville Attorney, Vacaville Lawyer

Did Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce Sign a Prenup?

Did Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce sign a prenup? The short answer is: we don’t know. Despite widespread media speculation, Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce have not publicly confirmed a marriage or disclosed whether they have signed a prenuptial agreement.

But whether Taylor and Travis have a prenup highlights a much broader issue: Should you consider a prenuptial agreement before getting married?

Although prenups are often associated with celebrities and billionaires, they’re becoming increasingly common for everyday couples. A prenuptial agreement can help couples communicate openly about finances, reduce uncertainty, and decide in advance how certain financial matters will be handled if life doesn’t go as planned.

Why Are Prenuptial Agreements Becoming More Common?

According to a 2022 Harris Poll discussed by Newsweek, more Americans are signing prenuptial agreements, particularly younger adults who view them as practical financial planning rather than a sign of mistrust.

The Bar Association of San Francisco encourages couples to think of a prenuptial agreement as a marriage plan rather than simply a divorce plan. Without a prenup, California law provides the default rules that will govern many financial issues if a marriage ends. A well-drafted agreement simply allows couples to make many of those decisions themselves.

Why Do Couples Choose a Prenup?

Every couple’s situation is different, but a prenuptial agreement may help:

Protect property owned before marriage.
Help define what will remain separate property and what will become marital property.
Clarify responsibility for debts.
Preserve a family business or professional practice.
Protect inheritances and family wealth.
Help preserve assets intended for children from a prior relationship.
Reduce uncertainty and the cost of future legal disputes.

Are There Any Downsides?

Like any legal agreement, prenuptial agreements have potential disadvantages. Some couples find that:

Financial discussions can be uncomfortable.
Negotiating too close to the wedding may create unnecessary pressure.
An unfair or one-sided agreement may not be enforceable.
Prenuptial agreements cannot determine child custody or child support.
Both parties should fully understand the agreement before signing.

California Law Provides Important Protections

California law includes important safeguards designed to help ensure that prenuptial agreements are fair. California Family Code section 1615 provides that a court may decline to enforce a prenup if it was not entered into voluntarily or if it was unconscionable and the challenging party did not receive fair financial disclosure. The law also generally requires that the final agreement be provided at least seven days before it is signed, and additional protections apply when a prenuptial agreement limits or waives spousal support.

What Can We Learn from Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce?

So, did Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce sign a prenup? We don’t know. But if they did, there are plenty of good reasons why they may have—including protecting separate property, creating financial clarity, and reducing the potential for future disputes.

A prenuptial agreement isn’t necessarily about planning for divorce. For many couples, it’s about planning for marriage by having honest conversations and deciding together how financial issues will be handled before saying “I do.”

If you’re considering marriage and wondering whether a prenuptial agreement is right for your situation, David Knecht has extensive experience helping California clients prepare prenuptial agreements and other family law matters. To schedule a consultation, contact the Law Office of David Knecht at (707) 451-4502.

Filed Under: Divorce Attorney, Divorce Lawyer, Fairfield Attorney, Fairfield Lawyer, Family Law, Vacaville Attorney, Vacaville Lawyer

Does a Nevada Asset Protection Trust Protect California Property?

Does a Nevada Asset Protection Trust Protect California Property? It’s a question many California property owners ask after hearing about Nevada’s favorable asset protection laws. Nevada is well known for allowing self-settled asset protection trusts that can provide significant protection from certain creditors under Nevada law. However, a recent federal court decision reminds us that creating a Nevada trust does not automatically protect California real estate from creditor claims.

In United States v. Huckaby, the United States sought to enforce a federal tax judgment against California real property that had been transferred to a Nevada asset protection trust. The property was located in El Dorado County, California, and the court concluded that the IRS’s judgment lien attached to the taxpayer’s one-half ownership interest in the property. The court allowed the government to move forward with foreclosure proceedings. Readers can review the court’s opinion on Google Scholar.

Why Did the Court Rule This Way?

Although every case depends on its own facts, several important factors influenced the court’s decision.

The property was located in California.
The trust was a self-settled Nevada asset protection trust.
The taxpayer and his spouse were the trust’s settlors, trustees, and lifetime beneficiaries.
The creditor was the IRS, which has powerful federal collection rights.
The court concluded that California law governed whether the taxpayer’s interest in the California real estate could be reached by creditors.

What Does This Mean for California Property Owners?

Many people choose Nevada asset protection trusts because Nevada law offers stronger protections than California law for certain self-settled trusts. The goal is often to protect assets from future creditors while allowing the creator to remain a beneficiary of the trust. However, the Huckaby decision illustrates that transferring California real estate into a Nevada trust does not automatically provide those protections. The case offers several practical lessons for California property owners:

Real estate is generally governed by the law of the state where it is located.
Simply creating a Nevada asset protection trust does not guarantee that California real estate will be protected from creditors.
Courts will examine how the trust is structured and how much control the creator retains over the assets.
The type of creditor matters. Government agencies such as the IRS may have collection rights that differ from those of private creditors.
Asset protection planning should always consider both California law and federal law.

Does a Nevada Asset Protection Trust Protect California Property?

Not necessarily. The Huckaby decision does not mean Nevada asset protection trusts are ineffective. Instead, it shows that their effectiveness depends on the specific facts, including the property’s location, the trust’s terms, the type of creditor involved, and the applicable state and federal law. As the case illustrates, transferring California real estate into a Nevada asset protection trust does not, by itself, prevent creditors from reaching the property.

Experienced Estate Planning Advice Matters

If you own California real estate and are considering an asset protection trust, obtaining legal advice before transferring property can help you avoid costly mistakes. Estate planning and asset protection strategies should be tailored to your individual goals, your assets, and your family’s circumstances. David Knecht has extensive experience helping California families with estate planning tools and strategies. Contact the Law Office of David Knecht at (707) 451-4502 to schedule a consultation.

Filed Under: California Estate Plan, Estate Planning, Estates, Fairfield Attorney, Fairfield Lawyer, Power of Attorney, Probate Lawyer, Trust Administration Attorney , Vacaville Attorney, Vacaville Lawyer

Estate Planning Strategies to Reduce Tax Burdens for Your Heirs

This article will focus on estate planning strategies to reduce tax burdens for your heirs—so you can leave more of your legacy to your loved ones and less to the IRS. Even if your estate won’t owe federal estate tax, your heirs may still face capital gains, income tax on retirement accounts, or property tax reassessment in California. Smart planning today can minimize those liabilities and ensure your assets are transferred as efficiently and tax-effectively as possible.

Understand the taxes your heirs may face

There are several types of taxes that may affect your heirs—even if your estate doesn’t owe federal estate tax:

Capital gains tax on appreciated property sold after death
Income tax on inherited retirement accounts like IRAs and 401(k)s
Property tax reassessment in California (due to Proposition 19)
Gift tax consequences from large lifetime transfers
Generation-skipping transfer tax in high-value estate plans

These taxes can reduce inheritances if your estate plan doesn’t anticipate them.

Understand the difference between estate taxes and taxes heirs may owe

A common source of confusion is the difference between taxes owed by the estate itself versus taxes that heirs may owe after they inherit.

Estate-level taxes are paid before anything is distributed. These include federal estate tax (for estates over the exemption), final income taxes for the deceased, and any taxes owed on income the estate earns while it’s being administered.
Heir-level taxes come later and are usually tied to how the inherited asset is used. For example, capital gains tax only applies if the heir later sells inherited property at a profit. Income tax applies when heirs withdraw from inherited IRAs or 401(k)s. Property tax reassessment may happen when real estate is transferred—unless the heir qualifies for an exclusion under Proposition 19.

Not all taxes are inevitable. Some can be delayed, minimized, or avoided entirely with proper planning. That’s why estate planning isn’t just about transferring assets—it’s about transferring them in the most tax-efficient way possible.

Use a revocable living trust to avoid costly mistakes

While a revocable trust doesn’t eliminate estate tax, it helps avoid probate and gives your heirs flexibility and control. As explained by Tax Shark, revocable trusts don’t reduce the size of your estate for tax purposes—but they can still save time, legal fees, and confusion.

Trusts can be structured to allow for post-death tax elections or qualified disclaimers when appropriate.
They help preserve valuable tax benefits, such as the step-up in basis for appreciated assets, by reducing the risk of unintended lifetime transfers.
They allow assets to be distributed according to your wishes over time, providing greater flexibility and protection for beneficiaries.
Depending on the assets involved and the beneficiaries’ circumstances, the timing of distributions may also create tax planning opportunities.

Take advantage of the step-up in basis

One of the most powerful tax benefits under current law is the step-up in basis.

When someone dies, the cost basis of appreciated property (like real estate or stocks) is “stepped up” to its current market value
This often eliminates years of capital gains taxes if the property is sold shortly after inheritance
If you give away the property during your lifetime, your heirs may lose this benefit

SmartAsset and Investopedia both emphasize the importance of preserving this benefit by avoiding premature transfers of highly appreciated assets.

Plan carefully for retirement accounts

Retirement accounts don’t receive a step-up in basis, and most non-spouse heirs must now withdraw the full balance within 10 years due to the SECURE Act.

Withdrawals are taxed as ordinary income, which could push heirs into higher tax brackets
Converting some of your traditional IRA to a Roth IRA during your lifetime may reduce that burden
Consider whether to name individuals or a qualified see-through trust as beneficiary, depending on the situation

Use trusts strategically

Trusts can be structured in ways that reduce taxes or shift income to lower-bracket beneficiaries. As Fidelity explains, the key is picking the right type of trust for your goals.

Bypass trusts help preserve estate tax exemptions for married couples
Irrevocable life insurance trusts (ILITs) remove insurance proceeds from your estate
Charitable remainder trusts and GRATs reduce estate size while offering tax-deferred growth or income
SmartAsset provides a good overview of how trusts reduce estate tax exposure

Even if estate taxes aren’t a factor now, trusts offer control, privacy, and protection for heirs.

Consider lifetime gifting—but do it carefully

Lifetime gifts can reduce your taxable estate and shift appreciating assets out of your name, but they come with trade-offs.

In 2026, you can give up to $19,000 per person per year without using your lifetime gift and estate tax exemption.
Larger gifts reduce your federal lifetime gift and estate tax exemption (currently $13.61 million per person)
Gifting appreciated assets removes the step-up in basis benefit your heirs would otherwise receive

As Schwab notes, lifetime gifting works best when part of a broader strategy that considers capital gains and estate taxes.

Factor in California property tax rules

Under Proposition 19, California dramatically narrowed the exclusions that allow children to inherit real estate without reassessment.

Now, unless the heir moves into the home and claims it as their primary residence, the property may be reassessed to full market value
This can result in significantly higher annual property tax bills for children who inherit a family home or rental
An estate plan can include ways to time or structure transfers for eligible beneficiaries, or help the surviving spouse retain favorable assessments

For more background on how reassessment works, see this Proposition 13 overview from the California Board of Equalization.

In summary

Reducing estate taxes is only part of the picture—income tax, capital gains, and property tax can take just as big a bite if you don’t plan for them. With the right strategies, like trusts, proper titling, Roth conversions, and careful gifting, you can leave more to your loved ones and less to the IRS.

The Law Offices of David Knecht can help you build a customized estate plan that accounts for your goals and your family’s future—so your legacy passes on cleanly, efficiently, and tax-smart. Contact us today at (707) 451-4502.

Filed Under: California Estate Plan, Digital Estate Plan, Estate Planning, Estates, Fairfield Attorney, Fairfield Lawyer, Living Trust , Living Will, Probate Lawyer, Trust Administration Attorney , Vacaville Attorney, Vacaville Lawyer

Can Your Ex Spend Your Retirement Money?

Can your ex spend your retirement money? That’s the question raised by a recent dispute involving former Bachelorette star Deanna Pappas. According to reports of court filings, Pappas claims her ex-husband withdrew approximately $109,000 from a retirement account before transferring to her the share she was awarded in their California divorce. Her ex-husband’s reported defense is that he is experiencing severe financial hardship after losing his job and used the money for living expenses, support obligations, and business expenses.

Whether his explanation ultimately succeeds is up to the court. But the case raises an important question for anyone going through a California divorce.

Can Your Ex Spend Your Retirement Money?

In most cases, the answer is no.

Once a California divorce judgment awards part of a retirement account to the other spouse, that spouse has a legal interest in those funds. One spouse generally cannot decide to spend the other person’s share simply because they believe they need the money more. The California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) likewise explains that a former spouse may have a community property interest in retirement benefits that must be addressed before benefits are distributed.¹

Financial hardship may explain why someone made the withdrawal, but it does not automatically excuse violating a court order.

What If Your Ex Already Spent the Money?

If your former spouse withdraws or spends retirement funds that should have been divided, you are not necessarily out of luck.

Depending on the facts of your case, a California court may:

Order your former spouse to repay the money.
Award interest on the amount that should have been transferred.
Order payment of attorney’s fees.
Enforce the divorce judgment through additional court orders.
In appropriate cases, impose sanctions or other remedies.

Every case is different, but California courts have broad authority to enforce property division orders. In many cases, dividing retirement accounts also requires a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) or other court order before the retirement plan can distribute benefits.

Act Before the Problem Gets Worse

Retirement accounts often require additional legal steps before they can be divided. During delays, some people mistakenly believe they are free to withdraw or spend money that has already been awarded to their former spouse.

The longer you wait to address the problem, the more difficult recovering those funds can become.

Protect Your Retirement Money

If your former spouse has withdrawn retirement funds, failed to transfer assets awarded in your divorce, or refuses to comply with your California divorce judgment, you may have legal options. For help enforcing a California divorce judgment or for any other family law matter, contact David Knecht Law at (707) 451-4502.

Filed Under: Divorce Attorney, Divorce Lawyer, Divorce Planning, Fairfield Attorney, Fairfield Lawyer, Vacaville Attorney, Vacaville Lawyer

What if a child wants to stop using one parent’s last name

Recent reports indicate that several of Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie‘s children have stopped publicly using the “Pitt” surname. Daughter Shiloh reportedly petitioned to remove “Pitt” from her last name shortly after turning 18, while son Maddox has also been the subject of reports regarding his use of the family name. Stories like these often raise an interesting legal question for divorced and separated parents: What if a child wants to stop using one parent’s last name before turning 18?

The answer may surprise many parents. In California, a minor child generally cannot simply decide to change their surname. When parents disagree about a name change, the issue may ultimately be decided by a judge.

Turning 18 Makes a Big Difference

Once a person reaches adulthood, they generally have the right to pursue a legal name change without obtaining permission from a parent.

For a minor child, however, the process is different.

A parent typically must file a petition with the court, and if the other parent objects, the court may be asked to decide whether the change should be allowed.

California Courts Do Not Automatically Favor Either Parent

Some parents assume that a child should automatically keep the father’s surname. Others assume that a child who primarily lives with one parent should automatically be allowed to adopt that parent’s last name.

California law generally follows neither approach.

In the landmark California Supreme Court case In re Marriage of Schiffman, the court rejected the idea that either parent has a superior right to determine a child’s surname. Instead, the court held that the controlling issue is the child’s best interests.

Subsequent California decisions have continued to apply that same rule. Courts focus on what outcome best serves the child rather than which parent prefers a particular surname.

That means a judge is not deciding which parent “deserves” to have the child carry their name. The focus is on the child’s welfare.

What Factors Do California Courts Consider?

California courts have answered the question, “what if a child wants to stop using one parent’s last name,” by identifying a number of factors that may be relevant when deciding whether a child’s surname should be changed.

These factors can include:

• How long the child has used the current surname

• The child’s age and maturity

• The child’s relationship with each parent

• Whether the child identifies with a particular family unit

• Potential confusion, disruption, or embarrassment that may result from a change

• The child’s preference, particularly if the child is older

No single factor automatically controls the outcome. Instead, courts evaluate the specific circumstances of each family and determine what result best serves the child’s interests. California courts have often emphasized that the longer a child has used a surname, the more difficult it may be to justify a change. A child who has used the same surname for many years may have developed social, school, and family connections associated with that name, and courts may consider the potential disruption that a change could cause.

Does a Teenager’s Preference Matter?

While a minor child generally cannot legally change a surname without court involvement, California courts may consider the child’s wishes as part of the best-interest analysis. The significance of those wishes may depend on the child’s age, maturity, and ability to express a reasoned preference.

As children grow older and develop stronger personal, social, and educational identities associated with a particular surname, courts may consider those circumstances when evaluating whether a proposed name change is in the child’s best interests.

That does not mean the child gets the final decision. A child’s preference is only one factor among many that a court may conside

Can One Parent Change the Child’s Name Without Permission?

Usually not.

If one parent seeks a name change and the other parent does not consent, California law generally requires notice to the other parent and provides an opportunity to object.

The court may then determine whether the proposed change is in the child’s best interests.

As a result, a parent generally cannot remove the other parent’s surname simply because the parents are divorced, disagree with one another, or have a strained relationship.

A Name Change Is Not Automatic Simply Because the Parents Are Divorced

Parents are sometimes surprised to learn that divorce alone is usually not enough to justify changing a child’s surname.

Likewise, conflict between parents, hurt feelings, or a strained co-parenting relationship will not automatically support a name change.

The court’s focus remains on the child’s welfare rather than either parent’s preferences.

In other words, when parents ask whether a child can drop a parent’s last name in California, the answer usually depends on whether the requested change is in the child’s best interests under the specific facts of the case.

Sometimes the Name Dispute Is About Something Bigger

In many cases, a disagreement over a child’s surname reflects larger family issues.

The dispute may involve:

• Child custody

• Parenting time

• Parent-child relationships

• Communication problems between parents

• Allegations that one parent is undermining the child’s relationship with the other

For that reason, name-change requests often arise in the context of broader family law disputes.

Seeking Legal Advice

A child’s surname can carry significant emotional meaning for both parents and children. When parents disagree about a proposed name change, the issue can quickly become more complicated than many people expect.

If you have questions about what happens when a child wants to stop using one parent’s last name, or any other family law matter involving child custody, parenting plans, parental rights, or divorce, David Knecht Law serves clients throughout Solano County, Napa County, and Yolo County. Call (707) 451-4502 to discuss your California family law matter.

Filed Under: Divorce Attorney, Divorce Lawyer, Fairfield Attorney, Fairfield Lawyer, Vacaville Attorney, Vacaville Lawyer

Celebrities Who Have Made Co-Parenting Successful

Celebrity breakups often make headlines, but some former couples attract attention for a different reason: their ability to successfully raise children together after a relationship ends. In fact, a recent article highlighting celebrities who have made co-parenting successful showcases several well-known parents who have prioritized their children’s well-being despite divorce or separation. While celebrity families face unique pressures, many of the co-parenting habits they demonstrate mirror the same principles California courts encourage in child custody cases.

Celebrity Co-Parents Who Have Made It Work

Several high-profile former couples have demonstrated that a romantic relationship can end while a parenting relationship continues:

Ben Affleck and Jennifer Garner – Despite their divorce, the pair have consistently emphasized their commitment to raising their three children together. They are frequently seen attending family events and supporting one another’s parenting efforts.
Gigi Hadid and Zayn Malik – The former couple shares a daughter and has spoken publicly about coordinating schedules and putting their child’s needs first.
Gwyneth Paltrow and Chris Martin – Known for their concept of “conscious uncoupling,” they have maintained a cooperative parenting relationship and frequently spend time together as a family.
Kourtney Kardashian and Scott Disick – Although their personal relationship has had challenges, they have continued to work together as parents and remain involved in their children’s lives.
Orlando Bloom and Miranda Kerr – Both have publicly praised one another and have maintained an amicable relationship while raising their son.
Jennifer Lopez and Marc Anthony – The former spouses have continued to work together as parents and have frequently discussed the importance of supporting their children.

While every family situation is different, these examples show that successful co-parenting is possible even after a difficult breakup.

Co-Parenting and California Child Custody Law

California family courts focus on the best interests of the child when making custody decisions. California Family Code § 3020 states that it is the public policy of California to ensure that children have “frequent and continuing contact” with both parents after separation or divorce, except where such contact would not be in the child’s best interests. The statute also emphasizes encouraging parents to share the rights and responsibilities of child-rearing whenever appropriate.

Parents who successfully co-parent often:

Communicate respectfully with one another.
Keep children out of adult conflicts.
Support the child’s relationship with the other parent.
Follow court orders and parenting plans.
Work together on important decisions involving education, health care, and activities.
Remain flexible when unexpected issues arise.

Courts generally view these behaviors favorably because they promote stability and reduce stress for children. Additionally, California Family Code § 3011 directs courts to consider factors affecting a child’s health, safety, and welfare when making custody determinations, making cooperative parenting an important consideration in many cases.

Authority: California Family Code §§ 3020 and 3011 are among the strongest and most frequently cited legal authorities regarding California child custody and co-parenting principles.

Lessons California Parents Can Learn

The experiences of these celebrity co-parents who have made co-parenting successful demonstrate several important lessons that apply to everyday families.

First, children benefit when parents prioritize the child’s needs over past relationship conflicts.

Second, communication matters. Parents do not have to be best friends, but they should be able to exchange information and coordinate schedules effectively.

Third, flexibility can prevent unnecessary disputes. Life changes, school schedules change, and children develop new interests. Parents who can adapt often experience fewer conflicts.

Finally, consistency helps children feel secure. A clear parenting schedule and predictable expectations can reduce anxiety and help children thrive.

When Co-Parenting Becomes Difficult

Unfortunately, not every co-parenting relationship runs smoothly. Disagreements over custody schedules, school choices, extracurricular activities, relocation, and decision-making authority can lead to conflict.

When disputes arise, legal guidance may help parents understand their rights and responsibilities under California law. In some situations, mediation or modifications to existing custody orders may be necessary to create a workable parenting arrangement.

When Your Ex Won’t Put the Children First

Co-parenting can be challenging, especially when one parent allows personal conflicts to interfere with the children’s needs. Whether the issue involves custody exchanges, communication, scheduling, or decision-making, ongoing conflict can create unnecessary stress for both parents and children.

If your ex consistently puts their own interests ahead of what is best for the children, you do not have to navigate the situation alone. An experienced family law attorney can help you understand your rights and explore options for protecting your relationship with your children.

If you have concerns about custody, parenting time, or enforcement of existing court orders, contact the Law Offices of David Knecht at (707) 451-4502.

Filed Under: Divorce Attorney, Divorce Lawyer, Divorce Planning, Fairfield Attorney, Fairfield Lawyer, General, Vacaville Attorney, Vacaville Lawyer

Is Avoiding Probate in California Worth It?

When someone passes away in California, their estate often goes through a legal process called probate—unless they’ve taken steps to avoid it. For many families, probate can be time-consuming, public, and expensive. A common question people ask: is avoiding probate in California worth it?

The answer depends on the size of your estate, the types of assets you own, and your estate planning goals. Let’s explore what probate is, how it works, and whether avoiding it should be part of your estate plan.

What is probate?

Probate is the court-supervised process of distributing a person’s assets after death. It includes:

Validating the will (if there is one)
Appointing an executor or administrator
Notifying creditors and paying debts
Distributing remaining assets to heirs

In California, probate is handled by the Superior Court in the county where the decedent lived. For example, if a person who lived in Vacaville passes away, the probate matter would generally be handled by the Superior Court of California, County of Solano.

The process typically takes 9 months to over a year—but larger or contested estates can take longer.

Do all estates go through probate?

Not necessarily. California law provides several important exceptions:

Assets held in a revocable living trust bypass probate entirely if properly funded.
Accounts with named beneficiaries (like retirement plans or life insurance) transfer automatically.
Joint tenancy property transfers directly to the surviving owner.
Certain Small estates may qualify for a simplified process using a small estate affidavit.
Spousal property petitions can be used to expedite transfers between married partners.

So while probate is common, many estates—especially well-planned ones—can avoid it.

Why do people want to avoid probate?

There are several reasons families aim to bypass the probate process:

Time delays – Even simple cases take months; complex ones can drag on for years.
Costs – California’s statutory probate fees are based on the gross value of the estate, not net assets.
Lack of privacy – Probate records are public, meaning anyone can access information about your estate.
Court oversight – Probate requires court filings, notices to creditors, and approval for many actions.

As Forbes explains, avoiding probate can reduce fees, shorten timelines, and preserve privacy for your loved ones.

How much does probate cost in California?

Probate costs can add up quickly, especially for mid-sized or larger estates. Here’s a breakdown:

Statutory fees, see California Probate Code §§ 10810–10814, for the executor and attorney are set by law:
- 4% of the first $100,000
- 3% of the next $100,000
- 2% of the next $800,000
- 1% of the next $9 million
For example, a $500,000 estate would generate $13,000 in fees for the attorney and another $13,000 for the executor—a total of $26,000.
Extraordinary fees, California Probate Code § 10811(c), may apply for managing property sales, handling taxes, or defending contested wills.
Other common costs include court filing fees, appraisal fees, publication costs for public notices and bond premiums (if required). As Charles Schwab points out, avoiding probate often allows families to preserve more wealth and skip these administrative burdens.

Strategies for avoiding probate in California

Create a revocable living trust
- Assets titled in the trust pass outside of probate.
- Trusts also help manage incapacity and preserve privacy.
Use proper beneficiary designations
- Accounts like IRAs, life insurance, and some bank accounts can transfer directly to beneficiaries.
Hold assets in joint tenancy
- Real property titled this way goes automatically to the co-owner.
Record a transfer-on-death (TOD) deed
- For real estate, a TOD deed lets you name a beneficiary to inherit property without court approval.
Use small estate affidavits
- Certain smaller estates may qualify for simplified procedures, as detailed in this San Francisco Chronicle article, as detailed in this San Francisco Chronicle article.
Spousal property petitions
- A streamlined process available when the surviving spouse is the primary heir.

Is avoiding probate always the right choice?

So, is avoiding probate in California worth it? In many cases, the answer is yes. Probate can be time-consuming, expensive, and public, making probate-avoidance strategies attractive for many families. However, smaller estates may qualify for simplified procedures, and some people can accomplish their goals with a simple will and properly designated beneficiaries.

The best answer depends on your unique circumstances. If you’re not sure whether your current estate plan protects your loved ones from probate, the Law Offices of David Knecht can help you evaluate your assets and develop a plan tailored to your goals. Contact us today at (707) 451-4502.

Filed Under: California Estate Plan, Digital Estate Plan, Estate Planning, Estates, Fairfield Attorney, Fairfield Lawyer, Living Trust , Living Will, Power of Attorney, Probate Lawyer, Trust Administration Attorney , Vacaville Attorney, Vacaville Lawyer

What Happens If You Lose Mental Capacity Without an Estate Plan?

When famed actor Bruce Willis was diagnosed with frontotemporal dementia and forced to step away from the spotlight, it was a sobering reminder of how quickly life can change. At just 67 years old, he began experiencing symptoms that affected his memory and speech, eventually losing the ability to communicate due to aphasia (People, Today). While we don’t know whether Bruce Willis had an estate plan, his story reminds us that anyone—no matter how rich or famous—can unexpectedly lose mental capacity without an estate plan in place.

The Risks of Losing Capacity Without a Plan

If you lose mental capacity without an estate plan, the consequences can be devastating both for you and your loved ones. Without clear legal documents that express your wishes, families often face confusion, conflict, and costly court proceedings.

Here’s what might happen if you don’t plan ahead:

Court intervention is required. Your family may have to go through a court process called conservatorship or guardianship to gain the authority to manage your affairs. This process is public, time-consuming, and expensive.
You don’t get to choose your decision-makers. A judge—who doesn’t know you or your values—could appoint someone to make financial and medical decisions on your behalf.
Family conflicts may erupt. If loved ones disagree on what’s best, your care and finances could become a source of division or even litigation.
Your care may not reflect your values. Without guidance, caregivers may make decisions you would never have wanted.

Why Planning Ahead Matters

According to Forbes, America faces a $780 billion crisis tied to aging and disability. As lifespans increase, more families are caring for elderly parents with cognitive issues, and lack of planning only makes the burden heavier. Estate planning isn’t just about distributing assets after death—it’s about protecting your autonomy and easing the burden on your loved ones if something happens while you’re still alive.

A good estate plan includes tools like:

Durable power of attorney for finances
Advance health care directives for healthcare
Living trusts to manage your property
HIPAA authorizations to allow access to medical records
Instructions for long-term care preferences to guide those making decisions for you

It’s important to note that if you lose mental capacity, you may no longer qualify under California’s End of Life Option Act, which allows certain terminally ill adults to request medical aid in dying. The law requires individuals to be mentally competent and physically able to self-administer the medication. While you cannot authorize medical aid in dying in advance, you can—and should—create an advance health care directive expressing your wishes regarding pain management, life-sustaining treatment, and end-of-life care. Without proper planning, you may receive care that does not align with your values and create additional emotional stress for your loved ones.

Protect Yourself and Your Family

If you lose mental capacity without an estate plan, the legal, emotional, and financial fallout can be overwhelming. But with proper planning, you can:

Appoint people you trust to make decisions
Ensure your medical and personal wishes are honored
Avoid court battles and reduce stress on your family
Protect your assets and preserve your dignity

Bruce Willis’s condition reminds us that mental decline can come earlier than expected—and often without warning. Planning now, while you are well, is the best gift you can give your future self and the people you love.

To learn more about creating a comprehensive estate plan tailored to your needs, contact the Law Office of David Knecht at (707) 451-4502. We’re here to help you prepare for the unexpected and protect your peace of mind.

Filed Under: California Estate Plan, Digital Estate Plan, Estate Planning, Estates, Fairfield Attorney, Fairfield Lawyer, General, Living Trust , Living Will, Probate Lawyer, Trust Administration Attorney , Vacaville Attorney, Vacaville Lawyer