Legal Opinion
McArthur v. McArthur
California Court of Appeal
Decided March 11, 2014No. A137133PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
BRUINIERS, J.
In 2001, Frances E. McArthur created an inter vivos trust naming her three daughters—Deborah Tamisia, Kristi (Jensen) McArthur and Pamela McArthur—as coequal beneficiaries. Frances amended the trust instrument in 2011, allocating a greater portion of the trust property to Kristi and adding a provision requiring arbitration of disputes. After Frances’s death, Pamela sued Kristi, alleging financial elder abuse and claiming the 2011 amendment was invalid due to Kristi’s undue influence and Frances’s lack of testamentary capacity. Kristi moved to compel arbitration of Pamela’s…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc. v. CardegnaSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
- Pinnacle Museum Tower Ass'n v. Pinnacle Market Development (US), LLCCalifornia Supreme Court · 2012
- Hal Rachal, Jr. v. John W. ReitzTexas Supreme Court · 2013
- Ruiz v. PodolskyCalifornia Supreme Court · 2010
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- UFCW & Employers Benefit Trust v. Sutter Health CA1/5California Court of Appeal · 2015
- Jackson v. Superior Court of Contra Costa Cnty., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
- Gibbons v. AndersonCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2019
- Jackson v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2018
- Ruffier v. Volcano Hills Road Maintenance Assn.California Court of Appeal · 2026