First Admitted: 1994, California

Professional Webpage: https://streltzer.com/about/

Bar/Professional Activity:

California Conservatorship Practice (CEB Continuing Education of the Bar), Author/Update Author
California Decedent Estate Practice (CEB Continuing Education of the Bar), Author/Update Author

Verdicts/Settlements (Case Results):

Blech v. Blech (2018) 25 Cal.App.5th 989 (rev. den. CAL. 2018) (Google Scholar). Adam represented one of the prevailing respondents. The Court of Appeal was called upon to interpret and apply language in a trust instrument which directed the trustee to distribute certain real property to a beneficiary’s subtrust. That directive was merely a mechanism for funding that beneficiary’s residual gift, assuming the trustor still owned the property as of the trustor’s death. The reference to a specific source of funding—that certain property—did not make it a specific gift., 2018
Blech v. Blech (2019) 38 Cal. App. 5th 941 (rev. den. CAL. 2019) - A critical appellate decision interpreting and applying a new construction to California’s Probate Code provisions re spendthrift provisions in light of the California Supreme Court's decision in Carmack v. Reynolds (Cal. 2017) 2 Cal.5th 844., 2019

Special Licenses/Certifications:

Certificate in Geographic Information Systems (GIS). San Diego State University, 1994

Pro bono/Community Service:

Adam is a member in good standing of the Court-Appointed Counsel (CAC) (formerly Probate Volunteer Panel (PVP)) of the Los Angeles County Superior Court, 2012

Educational Background:

National Institute of Trial Advocacy (NITA) Deposition Skills Program (San Diego, California), 1995
J.D. McGeorge School of Law, University of the Pacific, 1994
B.A. Applied Geography, San Diego State University (San Diego, California), 1991

Scholarly Lectures/Writings:

As part of the 2025 Aviva K. Bobb Advanced CAC Training Program presented by the Los Angeles County Bar Association (LACBA), Adam and his co-presenter Hon. Daniel Juárez, Judge of the Superior Court (LASC) discussed the various issues and problems facing the appointed counsel (CAC) for a proposed conservatee in connection with medical testimony in contested conservatorship appointments. Their discussion included analysis of the Judicial Council’s previously required Capacity Declaration form, as well as its replacement in the form of the mandatory Confidential Capacity Assessment form and optional attachments., Author; Co-Presenter, Medical Testimony in Contested Conservatorship Appointments, Los Angeles County Bar Association (LACBA), 2025
Adam discussed recent topics that have been tending to bring what ordinarily would be undisputed trust administration issues into expensive and time-consuming disputes necessitating contested probate court proceedings., Presenter; Author, A Litigator's List of Hot Topics Tending to Bring Trust Administration into Court, San Fernando Valley Estate Planning Council (SFVEPC), 2024
Spears v. Spears (2023) 97 Cal.App.5th 1294 The California Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Spears v. Spears created a statewide cascade of consternation and confusion about the ruling and its effect upon both trust law and judgment enforcement. Adam discussed the effect and implications of the case holding as well as the recommended best practices of creditors when engaged in post-mortem debt collection and judgment enforcement efforts., Presenter; Author, What to Know After the Spears Case Ruling; No Not That One, San Fernando Valley Bar Association (SPVBA) Probate & Estate Planning Section, 2024
Don't overlook the mundane! An interesting discussion of the obligation for the trustee to serve notice to heirs, beneficiaries, and/or other interested persons pursuant to Section 16061.7 of the California Probate Code, including the policies underlying the requirement to give notice and authority-supported analysis of what constitutes compliant and deficient notices., Presenter; Author, Trustee Notice Pursuant to P.C. Section 16061.7; Don’t Overlook the Mundane, South Bay Bar Association, 2023
Ethical Guidelines for Los Angeles County Probate Court Appointed Counsel (CAC) - You, a seasoned attorney with the required level of work experience in the various fields of law covered by the protective proceeding division of the Probate Code (Division 4, including conservatorship, guardianship, etc.), have been appointed as an attorney for a proposed Conservatee, Conservatee, or person alleged to lack legal capacity. You are an attorney, representing a client, in a pending court proceeding under the Probate Code. But how do you go about doing your job as “Court Appointed Counsel,” or “CAC,” to represent your client in the subject court proceeding? To understand the nature of your role as CAC, we must first understand how and why you were appointed, and, second, review and apply the procedural and ethical guidelines that are applicable to your appointment., Co-Presenter; Co-Author, Ethical Guidelines for Los Angeles County Probate Court Appointed Counsel (CAC) - 2022 Fundamental-Refresher CAC Training Program, Los Angeles County Bar Association (LACBA), 2022
GAL and CAC: The Intersection of Differing Methods to Effect Adequate Representation in the Courthouse. The rights and interest of minors, incompetents, and those who lack the ability to adequately represent themselves in adversarial proceedings in the courthouse may be protected by the appointment of a Guardian ad litem (GAL), by an attorney (a.k.a. Court Appointed Counsel, or CAC), or both. The roles, duties, and obligations of lawyers (CAC) and representatives (GAL) often overlap. It is important for everyone involved in a court proceeding to ensure that all necessary and indispensable parties are adequately represented in the courthouse., Co-Presenter; Co-Author, GAL and CAC: The Intersection of Differing Methods to Effect Adequate Representation in the Courthouse, San Fernando Valley Bar Association (SPVBA), 2022
"Evolving Dynamics in California Conservatorships; Use and Abuse of the Preferred Nominee Status Pursuant to Conservatorship of Ramirez (2001)" - Recent changes to the Probate Code have encouraged the trial courts to give more weight to the preferences of proposed conservatees and their counsel, and, at the same time, placed heightened scrutiny over the conduct of independent, professional conservators and the reasons for their appointment. Interested persons are more likely to appear in conservatorship proceedings to challenge the appointment of neutral, independent professionals. The case opinion in Conservatorship of Ramirez (2001) 90 Cal.App.4th 390 is critical. Those who plan and/or administer estates should be aware of, and accommodate in their practice, the increased importance of written nominations and other expressions of preference by their clients, as well as the circumstances when that preference may or may not be effectuated in conservatorship proceedings. , Presenter; Author, Evolving Dynamics in California Conservatorships; Use and Abuse of the Preferred Nominee Status Pursuant to Conservatorship of Ramirez (2001), San Fernando Valley Estate Planning Council (SFVEPC), 2022
"The Role of a Conservatee's Counsel and Changes to Probate Code §1471" - Adam and his co-presenter Bryan Wittlin discussed the evolving role, in light of changes to California Probate Code §1471, of the attorney for the conservatee, proposed conservatee, and person whose capacity is subject to challenge., Presenter; Co-Author, Aviva Bobb Advanced CAC Training - LACBA 2022 - "The Role of a Conservatee's Counsel and Changes to Probate Code §1471", Los Angeles County Bar Association (LACBA), 2022
"To Waive or Not to Waive, That is the Question: Handling Waiver, Appearances, and the Reading of Rights" Proposed Conservatees are required to receive notice of the proceedings, appear at the hearing, and be informed of their rights.But...Does it really matter? Does my client really need to receive these documents, be at the hearing, and listen to the judge recite this stuff? With my lengthy experience, can’t I handle this for him/her?, Presenter; Co-Author, Aviva Bobb Advanced CAC Training - LACBA 2021 - "To Waive or Not to Waive, That is the Question: Handling Waiver, Appearances, and the Reading of Rights", Los Angeles County Bar Association (LACBA), 2021
"That Isn't a Good Idea and I Can't Help You With That" (Judgment Enforcement Issues for Trust and Estate Practitioners) - Attorneys risk disciplinary action, and the evidentiary privileges otherwise generally afforded to attorneys will not shelter communications, where the attorney assists in an effort to fraudulently transfer assets. This may be the result even when the attorney does not have a subjective intent to engage in crime or fraud. Trust and estate practitioners should be aware of these limitations and, possibly, adjust their procedures accordingly., Presenter; Author, Judgment Enforcement Issues for Trust and Estate Practitioners -- That Isn't a Good Idea and I Can't Help You With That, Los Angeles County Bar Association (LACBA) Trusts & Estates Section, 2021
South Bay Bar Association, 2021, Presenter, Author, Interesting New Developments in Judgment Enforcement Law for Trust and Estate Practitioners: "There's No Place Like Home(stead)!", South Bay Bar Association, Estate Planning, 2021
Estate Counselors Forum, 2021, Co-Presenter, Co-Author, New Developments in Bankruptcy Law and Debtor-Creditors Relations Affecting Estate and Financial Planning, Estate Counselors Forum, Estate Planning, 2021
The Impact of Recent Trust & Estate Case Law Being Developed in Non-Probate Court Forums - California has a sophisticated, well-developed body of case law and statutory authorities, supplemented by detailed procedural court rules, which empower the judges of the Superior Court assigned to handle probate matters (i.e., “Probate Court”) effectuate the legal principles inherited from the common law with respect to the administration of decedent’s estate, trusts, and personal protective proceedings. This is generally referred to as “probate law.” California also has a similar set of legal principles arising under the domestic relations laws (i.e., Family Law). And the United States in general has a similar set of legal principles arising under the bankruptcy laws. The underlying principles that guide the application of law to fact often differs between these various court systems. What is the impact of recent trust and estate case law arising from non-Probate Court forums, that is, the Family Law court system or the bankruptcy courts? This presentation discusses In re Nolan (Bankr. C.D.Cal. July 21, 2020) 618 B.R. 860 and In re Brace (Speier v. Brace) (Cal. July 23, 2020) 9 Cal.5th 903, Presenter; Author, The Impact of Recent Trust & Estate Case Law Being Developed in Non-Probate Court Forums, San Fernando Valley Bar Association (SFVBA), 2020
Spendthrift Trusts After Carmack and Blech; What Do We Do Now? Spendthrift trusts provide that a beneficiary's interest may not be alienated, assigned to creditors, or otherwise anticipated by the beneficiary. But, after Carmack v. Reynolds, spendthrift provisions no longer offer the same viability for those who wish to exercise the ’dead hand of control’ over their presumably improvident donees and beneficiaries to protect them from their own creditors. Further, because the interpretation of California’s spendthrift laws is a subject previously uncertain but clarified by this Court in its Carmack v. Reynolds decision, then the result of the Blech decision is that law is no longer clear, nor uniform—with a disparity between trusts with bankrupt beneficiaries with bankruptcy estates administered by Chapter 7 liquidation trustees versus those without. THE HARSH LESSON TO BE LEARNED is that, after Carmack v. Reynolds and Blech, the customary methods to protect improvident donees and beneficiaries using the traditional spendthrift trust rules can be ineffectual. The ‘Dead Hand Of Control’ is crippled – at least in the State of California. Presentation discusses Carmack v. Reynolds (2017) 2 Cal.5th 844 and Blech v. Blech (2019) 38 Cal.App.5th 941, Presenter; Author, Spendthrift Trusts After Carmack and Blech; What Do We Do Now?, San Fernando Valley Bar Association (SFVBA), 2020
Receiverships to Effectuate Family Law Orders and Judgments - Parties to a Family Law case are often at the extremes of litigant behavior. It is not a surprise to find highly aggressive and demanding parties involved in the proceedings. There should also be no surprise that doing so can generate responsive behavior by the other litigant, which is often obstreperous, intransigent, or unusually secretive and uncooperative. Divorcing couples often don’t get along, even when doing so is to their mutual advantage. Among other purposes, the Family Law Court is a court of equity specially designed to effectuate the reasonable and orderly dissolution of a marriage. But these types of situations foster disrespect with the judicial system and tends to perpetuate a cycle of further delay and conflict. The consequence is often an unnecessary and wasteful loss of or injury to marital property value and a denial of effective justice to the either or both of the parties in a Family Law case. When the parties cannot get along, and their actions jeopardize marital property and/or business interests, a court-appointed Receiver may be the only viable remedy that the Family Law Court has to prevent waste, loss, or injury, Presenter; Author, Receiverships to Effectuate Family Law Orders and Judgments, California Lawyers Association, 2020
Discussion of the statue of affairs surrounding California's spendthrift rules, Presenter; Author, After Carmack v. Reynolds, What the Blech to do Now?, Estate Counselors Forum, 2019
The Decline and Fall of the Spendthrift Clause - Discussion of California's modern "spendthrift" rules, including Probate Code §§15300 et seq., and the Carmack v. Reynolds (2017) 2 Cal.5th 844 and Frealy v. Reynolds (In re Reynolds) (9th Cir., Aug. 15, 2017) 867 F.3d 1119 cases., Co-Presenter; Co-Author, The Decline and Fall of the Spendthrift Clause, San Fernando Valley Estate Planning Council, 2018
Why, When, and How to Bring a Revocable Trust Proceeding into a Conservatorship Matter? Discussion regarding the circumstances whereby a California court may bring a conservatee’s pre-existing, revocable trust under ‘court supervision’, Co-Presenter; Co-Author, Why, When, and How to Bring a Revocable Trust Proceeding into a Conservatorship Matter, Los Angeles County Bar Association (LACBA), 2018
Discussion of creditor rights in California probate conservatorship cases, Presenter; Author, Creditor Rights in California Probate Conservatorship Cases: Confusing and Complicated, Beverly Hills Bar Association (BHBA) Elder Law Section, 2017
Creditor Rights During Trust Administration - Estate Counselors Forum, Presenter; Author, Creditor Rights During Trust Administration, Estate Counselors Forum, 2012
Representing Creditors in Estate Administration - Discussion of the theories and procedures that explain how creditors are affected by and participate in the probate process. National Business Institute (NBI), Presenter; Author, Representing Creditors in Estate Administration, National Business Institute (NBI), 2012

Firm News (Newsletters):

Death alone does not render a debt uncollectable; rather it simply makes the process that more difficult. Adam provides a guide for understanding how California law provides a process for collecting from the dead., The Basic Principles of Collecting from the Dead, Debt Collection, Judgment Enforcement, Probate

Industry Groups:

Creditors Rights
Probate & Trust litigation

Adam Streltzer