Administering Real Property in Probate

A frequent point of contention in a probate case is the disposition of the decedent's residence. Assuming of course that the decedent owned a residence at death. One party may want to retain the residence for sentimental reasons and move into the property. Another party may want to sell the property because the notion of operating a quasi-partnership with the other beneficiaries is quite unappealing. Finally one party may want to lease the property to generate income because they have experience as a landlord. Each of these ideas, however, is predicated on the property being "available."

A recent unpublished appellate decision highlighted the issue of an unwanted occupant at the residence.    

"Dustan Wright, who is self-represented, appeals an order entered by the probate court on June 5, 2025, granting the estate administrator's petition to eject him from possession of a single family home located at 845 Athens Avenue in Oakland, California belonging to the deceased, Mary Bates (hereafter, the Bates residence)."

"On April 18, 2025, the administrator of Mary Bates's estate, Tyehimba Kokayi (hereafter, the administrator), filed a verified petition against Wright to recover possession of the Bates residence. The petition alleged the property belongs to the estate, Wright and others had been squatting unlawfully there for 13 years, and Wright had been "h[olding] the property hostage" from the estate and Bates's heirs by filing multiple lawsuits in propria persona and yet had lost them all, including the prior appeal. It also alleged Wright had filed a petition in the probate case claiming damages against the administrator and to remove him as administrator, and his petition had been denied. It alleged he "now seeks to start the process all over again by filing another case (25CV112257) against the same parties" and "is a vexatious litigant." The petition alleged specifically that on March 3, 2025, Wright had filed "a new complaint in Alameda case number 25CV112[2]57 against Petitioner and other parties, including the same parties that he sued" previously. It alleged that, "[a]s of the date of this Petition, [Wright] has not vacated the Estate Real Property and continues to obstruct Petitioner from gaining possession" of the property. The petition sought an order compelling Wright and other occupants to surrender possession of the Bates residence and related relief."

The appellate court, in an unpublished decision, affirmed the trial court's decision to compel "Wright and other occupants to surrender possession of the Bates residence." 

Estate of Mary Esther Bates, Alameda County Superior Court case no. RP21094469.