Hudson v. Foster
The court held that a conservatee may appeal a probate court's denial of a motion to vacate a conservator's final account on the ground of extrinsic fraud-where misrepresentations of material fact constitute such fraud-and that the conservatee owes no.
Date Filed: September 07, 2021
Case Name: Hudson v. Foster
Case Number: B300017
Court: California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Five
(‘The Court holds that a conservatee may appeal a probate court’s denial of a motion to vacate a conservator’s final account on the ground of extrinsic fraud, and that misrepresentations of material fact in the account constitute such fraud. The appellate court rules that the conservatee has no duty to investigate the conservator’s representations unless he actually becomes aware of facts that would put a reasonably prudent person on notice of wrongdoing, rejecting the higher “should‑have‑known” standard applied by the trial court. This decision clarifies the diligence requirement for conservatees seeking to set aside fiduciary accounts, expanding protection against fraudulent conservators under California probate law.’, ‘c3125e47’)
This case summary was prepared for educational purposes. For the authoritative version, please refer to the full opinion or the official California Courts website.