In the Matter of the Mail Dispute	) July 11, 1997
Between					)
					)
CHARLES FUENTES				)
					)
	and				)
					)
ALFRED FUENTES				) P.S. Docket No. MD 97-189

APPEARANCE FOR CHARLES FUENTES:		Dale I. Sasaki, Esq.
					Sasaki & Knopf
					Four North Second Street, Suite 1215
					San Jose, CA  95113-1307

APPEARANCE FOR ALFRED FUENTES:		Alfred Fuentes
					10744 Santa Lucia Road
					Cupertino, CA  95014-3940

This mail dispute has been docketed pursuant to Postal Operations Manual (POM7, August 1, 1996) Section 616.21, which requires the Chief Field Counsel to forward certain unresolved mail disputes to the Judicial Officer for resolution. The mail in dispute, which is addressed to Lydia Fuentes, or Estate of Lydia Fuentes, at 10744 Santa Lucia Road, Cupertino, CA 95014-3940, is currently being held by the Cupertino Postmaster.

Disputant Alfred Fuentes submitted a sworn statement in support of his claim, as required by 39 C.F.R. §965.5, along with other supporting documents. Disputant Charles Fuentes did not, nor did he submit comments on Alfred's statement, as permitted by 39 C.F.R. §965.6. The following findings of fact are based on the material submitted by Alfred Fuentes, and the material forwarded by the United States Postal Service Law Department, San Francisco Office.

1. Lydia Fuentes died on March 19, 1997. The two disputants are her surviving sons. After Lydia's death, each disputant submitted a Postal Service Form 3575, Change of Address Order, directing that mail be forwarded to different post office boxes.

2. The underlying dispute in this case involves control of a Fuentes Family Trust, apparently created in October 1989. On September 25, 1996, Lydia Fuentes signed a "First Amendment of the Fuentes Family Trust." This document named herself as "Initial Trustee," and Alfred Fuentes as "Alternate Trustee."

3. The case file forwarded by the Law Department includes the following documents, apparently signed by Lydia Fuentes shortly before her death:

	a.  A Will (2 pages) signed on March 13, 1997, which
	    names Charles Fuentes as executor.

	b.  A "Revocation of the Survivor's Trust Portion of the
	    Fuentes Family Trust," signed on March 17, 1997.

	c.  "The Lydia Fuentes Living Trust," signed on March 17,
	    1997, which, in conjunction with the "Revocation"
	    noted above, seems to replace the Fuentes Family
	    Trust.

5. The Domestic Mail Manual (DMM) contains the following provision, at D042.2.4:

	Mail addressed to a deceased person may be received at
	the address of the deceased by anyone who would
	normally receive the addressee's mail at that address.  It
	may also be forwarded to a different address, such as that
	of an appointed executor or administrator, if an order of
	request is filed at the post office.

Our Rules of Practice, 39 C.F.R. §965.7, provide that a party who fails to file the sworn statement required by 39 C.F.R. §965.5 may be held in default, and that this is a basis for directing that the disputed mail be delivered as directed by the other party. Unless the record clearly establishes that Charles Fuentes is entitled to the mail, therefore, he could be held in default, and the mail be awarded to Alfred Fuentes.

Any argument on behalf of Charles must be based on his status as executor of Lydia's estate under the will executed on March 13, 1997. However, the signatures of the two witnesses, following the "Attestation Clause," are on a separate, otherwise unidentified page, and the type on that page is of a different stye from the will itself. Because of this uncertainty, and the absence of a sworn statement from Charles Fuentes, I cannot conclude that he is the lawful executor of his mother's estate. In addition, Alfred resides at the disputed address, and the material he submitted with his affidavit indicates that he is the person who has been actively managing several financial matters relating to the death of Lydia. The mail in dispute should be delivered as directed by Alfred Fuentes.

This decision deals only with delivery of the mail, not ownership of it. If Alfred Fuentes receives any mail that is clearly intended for Charles, it is his responsibility to forward that mail. Also, if either party obtains a court order directing delivery of the mail, postal regulations provide that mail will be delivered in accordance with such an order. DMM §D042.6.3.

The attached delivery order should be issued.

					Bruce R. Houston
					Chief Administrative Law Judge