Beginning April 1, 2025, expedited procedures are available for probate estates valued up to $750,000. These procedures have been available before, but were limited to $184,500 for personal property and even less for real estate. Now, the decedent’s primary residence and personal property up to the $750,000 limit are eligible for an expedited transfer or, in some cases, transfer by affidavit. This is a significant and welcome expansion of the expedited procedures.

Filing a full probate proceeding is much more involved, costly and time-consuming. This new procedure will speed up the transfer and should save on legal costs. Additionally, the fees in these expedited procedures are negotiable between the client and attorney. In a full probate proceeding, the fees are set by statute and calculated based on the value of the estate. With larger estates, the fees available to the attorneys are larger. With estates under $750,000, clients may have had a hard time finding firms prepared to engage for the limited fees available.

A full probate proceeding typically takes over a year. These expedited property transfers can be accomplished in a matter of months, or for some personal property assets by simple affidavit without going to court. To learn more about the procedures available in your particular situation, or for Estate Planning in advance, reach out to our experienced probate attorneys today. We look forward to serving you.

Filing a Mechanics Lien in California

Filing a mechanics lien in California is a complex process. The claimant must follow specific procedures and deadlines, often including a preliminary notice to the property owner and general contractor within certain timeframes.

Mechanics liens can be a powerful tool for contractors and suppliers to ensure they get paid for their work.  Mechanics liens also require careful attention to detail and compliance with California’s complex lien laws. Working with an experienced mechanics lien attorney can help protect your legal rights and increase your chances of getting paid for the work or materials you provided on the project.

Contact a Construction Law Professional

You may need a mechanics lien attorney if you are a contractor, subcontractor, or supplier who has not been paid for work or materials on a construction project and you are considering recording a mechanics lien. If you are an owner with a lien recorded against your property, an attorney might help you to get it removed.  An attorney can also help you evaluate your options and negotiate with property owners, subcontractors or general contractors to try to resolve the payment dispute without resorting to mechanics liens or litigation.

If you are a California contractor, subcontractor, or supplier or a property owner currently engaged in a dispute regarding payment for work performed, our team at Cirrus Law PC can help. Please contact the Managing Attorney of our firm, Joshua D. Brysk, to review your situation. Call (925) 463-1073 today.

Surprisingly, the answer to this question is you just might!  Let’s start with the basics:

Mediation is a process whereby parties engage a neutral third person (called a Mediator), to help them resolve disputes they have among them.  There might be two individuals, companies, two or more sets of parties or any number that have a common issue they want resolved.  One way to resolve disputes is an adversarial process like a court case or arbitration.  Either before or after a case is filed, the parties may choose to attempt to resolve the controversy through mediation.

A mediator does not decide the case, but tries to facilitate a resolution or settlement.  Typically, the parties split the cost of the Mediator’s fee and agree on a set of rules to follow for the mediation.  While the rules might vary in procedures, a key element is that the mediation is a confidential process. The concept is that parties should be free to share information and make offers and demands without fearing that it will be used against them later.  A successful mediation is one that ends the dispute with an enforceable agreement among all the parties.

There are many advantages to mediation as a process to resolve disputes.  The parties are in control of the process in a way that they are not in civil litigation or arbitration.  When you file a case, you ultimately give up control to a judge, jury and/or arbitrator to decide the case—pick winners and losers. Mediation takes away the inherent risks and uncertainty of outcomes. Mediation allows you to keep control and set terms to negotiate with others to find a common resolution.  Mediation is also a much quicker process: a mediation might be scheduled within a few weeks while a typical court case might not go to trial for two years or more.  Mediation is much less expensive. While you must pay for your own counsel and a portion of the mediator’s fees, in the end you will save significant attorney’s fees, litigation costs and possibly expert fees compared to full-fledged litigation.

So how could I get a unicorn, you might ask.  Well that is where mediation really differs from other dispute processes.  While other processes focus on deciding who is right, and then what remedies are available by following a strict set of rules, mediation is an open process.  The goal of mediation is to find common ground enough to reach an agreement among all the participants.  Mediation is not bound by a strict set of rules, only the ones that the parties set for themselves.  If you want a unicorn, judges and arbitrators cannot order it—the rules would not allow it.  If you want a unicorn, it would have to be part of what you asked for in your lawsuit and an available remedy under the law. If you want a unicorn in mediation, you only need to get the other party to agree to let you have it and that’s all.  It does not have to be part of the original case [or even really exist]. You simply say, “I get to keep the unicorn,” and they say, “fine,” and it’s a done deal.  Maybe they’ll ask to keep a dragon as a trade. Then it’s up to the mediator to help you close the deal.

If you would like to engage a skilled and experienced mediator with a very creative approach to resolving disputes, please call our firm (925) 463-1073 and inquire about the services of Joshua Brysk.

With the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic, government at all levels sought to ensure public safety.  At the outset, decisions based on available information led to many restrictive measures, including lockdowns or stay-at-home orders.  An offshoot was also many restrictions on a landlord’s ability to evict a tenant.  Slowly, those measures have been lifted over time and we are now returning to the pre-pandemic rules…mostly.

California’s Tenant Eviction Moratoria

California (and some of its counties) had some of the most restrictive rules for landlords, especially for residential tenants.  These eviction moratoria are now coming to an end.  In particular, Los Angeles and Alameda Counties are the latest to announce end dates for the moratoria, meaning after this date landlords can once again follow court procedures to evict tenants. Los Angeles County’s pandemic eviction moratorium is set to expire at the end of March.  Alameda County’s eviction moratorium is set to expire at the end of April.

Commercial Tenant Evictions

While most commercial evictions and a small subset of residential evictions were allowed during the last three years, most residential evictions were forbidden.  Even some tenants who have paid no rent were allowed to continue to live in the property.  With the lifting of the eviction moratoria, we expect the number of evictions to dramatically increase.  California is opening floodgates at reservoirs to let some of the recent rains flow.  The lifting of the eviction moratoria is opening a different kind of floodgate.

Eviction Backlog

We expect the backlog of evictions to be very great.  At the same time, there are still shortages of resources to deal with these evictions: court staff shortages, county sheriff staff shortages, financial distress on the system, etc.  It will take concerted effort from landlords to work through the system and take a case to conclusion.

Legal Assistance for Landlords

If you are a landlord looking to regain possession of your property, mitigate losses or collect back due rent, reach out to our experienced team at Cirrus Law PC for assistance.  We have more than 25 years of experience helping landlords, owners, and managers protect their interests. Our attorneys assist clients in all commercial real estate and eviction matters. Contact a member of our team by calling (925) 463-1073. You can also get in touch by completing an online contact form.

Joshua Brysk advocated in Superior Court for our client’s right to an Intradistrict Transfer and achieved the desired result. When starting 9th grade, the Student requested an Intradistrict Transfer (a transfer to a school within the same School District). The District denied the transfer request and subsequent appeals on the basis that the student played certain sports at school and the District had concerns about the balance of talent on the teams. Although the Student and his parents were certain that this was unfair and improper, they were also left with no way to get what the Student deserved until they hired our firm.

The Student’s family hired our firm and Mr. Brysk went right to work. The firm always looks for a more expeditious and cost effective resolution when possible. The District was issuing “blanket denials” to transfer requests from “incoming 9th grade males with an interest and, perhaps, an aptitude in athletics.” Mr. Brysk knew that the law does not allow the District to use concerns about athletic motivation (even if true) to deny transfers. First, Mr. Brysk attempted to convince the School District to follow the School Board Policy, District Regulations, and the Education Code on Intradistrict Transfers which require a random and unbiased process without considering academic or athletic performance. The Superintendent (and the School Board) refused to budge.

Mr. Brysk was at the top of his class in California Administrative Law and Practice and has published several articles in the California Regulatory Law Reporter. Guided by his knowledge of the law and procedure, he filed a Petition for a Writ of Mandate with the Superior Court to force the School District to follow the law. After hearing the case, the Judge admonished the School District and ordered the District to follow the law allowing the transfer. Within a week, the student was able to attend the School of his choice.

If you want help on your education law matter, please contact our attorneys for a case screening to see if we can help you.