In Estate of Sanders (1985) 40 Cal.3d 607, undisputed facts established that the decedent had a holographic will leaving her estate to her son (the father of the minor beneficiaries). After the death of the executor's son, the executor took the decedent to a meeting with the executor's attorney, where the decedent (who had been declared mentally incompetent many years before) executed a will leaving the executor the bulk of her estate. The son's widow and the beneficiaries reasonably relied on the executor to protect the beneficiaries' interest and were "lulled into a sense of security by his representations." (Id. at p. 619.) The executor, a family member, led the widow and beneficiaries to believe the will offered for probate would leave the entire estate to the beneficiaries; he concealed that he had arranged for the decedent to change her will to leave most of the estate to him; he assured the widow repeatedly he would represent the beneficiaries' interests; he expressly told them that they need not become involved in the probate proceedings and he advised them not to contact the probate attorney. (Id. at pp. 615-616, 619.) The Supreme Court held that the executor's actions constituted extrinsic fraud, reasonably relied upon by the beneficiaries and warranting equitable relief, despite their failure to contest the will within the statutory period and notwithstanding that the executor had provided them with all notices required by law.