Co-Trustee Disputes and Deadlock
California co-trustees must generally act unanimously. Probate Code section 15620 vests a trust power in two or more trustees jointly unless the trust says otherwise, so one co-trustee acting alone usually acts without authority — and a deadlock between them is resolved by petition, not by whoever moves first.
The default rule: both signatures, or neither
California’s default is unanimity. Probate Code section 15620 provides that, unless the trust instrument says otherwise, a power vested in two or more trustees may only be exercised by their unanimous action. That single sentence decides most co-trustee fights: the sibling who moved money, listed the house, or signed the retainer without the other is very often acting outside their authority. The instrument can displace the default — many trusts permit majority action, some give one trustee sole power over a defined category — so the document is read first. Section 16013 then imposes a duty running in the other direction: each co-trustee must participate in administering the trust, and must take reasonable steps to prevent a co-trustee from committing a breach or to compel them to redress one. The passive co-trustee who signed whatever was put in front of them has a problem of their own. Where the two cannot agree, either trustee or a beneficiary may petition under section 17200.
Sources: Probate Code s.15620 - Cotrustees must act unanimously · Probate Code s.16013 - Duty of cotrustees to participate and to prevent breach · Probate Code s.17200 - Petitions concerning internal affairs of trust · Verified 2026-08-17.
Three situations that look alike and are not
| Situation | Governing rule | What it means in practice |
|---|---|---|
| Co-trustee acts alone, other objects | §15620 unanimity, unless the trust says otherwise | The act was likely unauthorised; the question becomes what it cost the trust |
| Co-trustee is ill, travelling, or temporarily incapacitated | §15622 | The others may act alone, but only as necessary to carry out the trust or avoid irreparable injury |
| Co-trustee is present and simply refuses to engage | §16013 duty to participate | Not covered by §15622 — refusal to act is itself a breach of duty |
Deadlock is not a stalemate you have to live with
Co-trustees who cannot agree often spend a year believing the only options are surrender or attrition. They are not. A petition under section 17200 asks the court to instruct the trustees, and the court can decide the specific question — sell or hold, distribute or reserve — without removing anyone. Where the hostility itself is what is damaging the trust, section 15642 permits removal, and the court can remove one trustee or both.
The passive co-trustee’s exposure
The most common misunderstanding is that the quiet co-trustee is the safe one. Section 16013 says the opposite: the duty to take reasonable steps to prevent or redress a co-trustee’s breach means that knowing about the conduct and doing nothing is its own failure. A co-trustee who suspects the other is taking from the trust and stays silent to keep the peace can end up sharing the liability, and a surcharge can reach them too.
Related: removing a trustee under §15642, the underlying breach claim, compelling an accounting, how §15683 splits compensation between them, and a trustee who will not distribute.
Need help with legal fees?
We litigate select cases on contingency, with no upfront fees.
Costs are separate from the fee, and whether you are responsible for them is set out in the written agreement before you sign anything.
How contingency fees work in California
A contingency fee means the attorney is paid from what is recovered rather than by the hour, so a beneficiary who cannot fund litigation out of pocket can still bring a claim. California regulates these agreements closely. Under Business and Professions Code section 6147, the agreement must be in writing and the attorney must give the client a duplicate copy, signed by both, when the contract is made. It must state the agreed contingency rate; how disbursements and costs incurred in prosecuting or settling the claim will affect that fee; and to what extent the client could be required to pay for related matters. Unless the matter falls under section 6146, the agreement must also state that the fee is not set by law and is negotiable. These are not formalities: failure to comply with any provision of section 6147 makes the agreement voidable at the client’s option, leaving the attorney entitled only to a reasonable fee.
Sources: Business and Professions Code s.6147 - Contingency fee contracts · Verified 2026-08-03.
Not every matter suits a contingency arrangement, and the firm does not take every case on one. Whether yours qualifies depends on the facts, the likely recovery, and the assets actually available to satisfy a judgment. Ask when you call.
We Answer 24/7 — Call Anytime · (415) 275-1492