In Evangelho v. Presoto (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 615, trust beneficiaries petitioned for an accounting, alleging the trustee had diverted trust funds to a joint tenancy bank account she controlled. The probate court ordered the trustee to account for trust funds and transactions involving the bank account. On the trustee's appeal, the trust beneficiaries argued the order to account was not appealable. The court agreed an order granting an accounting is not appealable under Probate Code section 1304 and explained that "until the accounting is made and the order sustaining objections or approving the accounting is entered, there is no appealable order." (Evangelho, supra, at p. 622.) But in the next paragraph of the opinion, the court held the order was appealable because "the issue is broader than the order of a mere accounting" and "the trustee's contention is that the court's order could not compel an accounting of the joint tenancy account because a joint tenancy account is an asset separate and distinct from the trust." (Evangelho, supra, 67 Cal.App.4th at p. 622.) The order compelling the trustee to account was appealable because it implicitly decided the joint tenancy account was a trust asset, which could be the subject of an appealable order. In that case, the appellant and the respondents were children of decedent Joan D. Evangelho. A consolidated appeal arose from two superior court orders which required the appellant to file a full accounting for a revocable living trust set up by decedent for the benefit of all her children. Among many contentions, the appellant argued there were no factual basis for the trial court's orders. Division 4 of the Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, concluded this lacked merit, stating: "No witnesses gave testimony and no documents were formally introduced into evidence in the present case. The factual record submitted for the appeal consists of the trust documents; respondents' verified petitions; statements in appellant's unsworn, unverified opposition memoranda; appellant's durable power of attorney for decedent; oral representations by counsel; a bank statement; canceled checks; and a declaration of respondent John M. Evangelho. "Probate Code section 1002 provides, 'an affidavit or verified petition shall be received as evidence when offered in an uncontested proceeding under this code.' Thus when challenged in a lower court, affidavits and verified petitions may not be considered as evidence at a contested probate hearing. (Estate of Wallace (1977) 74 Cal.App.3d 196, 200-201; Estate of Duncan (1969) 1 Cal.App.3d 212, 215.) "'However, where the parties do not object to the use of affidavits in evidence, and where both parties adopt that means of supporting their positions, the parties cannot question the propriety of the procedure on appeal. ... The trustee's petition and the objector's written objections were both verified in the form of declarations under the penalty of perjury. Absent an objection, these documents were properly considered as evidence. ' (Estate of Nicholas (1986) 177 Cal.App.3d 1071, 1088; Estate of Fraysher (1956) 47 Cal.2d 131, 134-135.) "Statements of fact in unsworn, unverified memoranda can also be properly considered as evidence in the absence of objections. (Greyhound Corp. v. Superior Court (1961) 56 Cal.2d 355, 359.)... "In the present case, both parties submitted the trust documents and some cancelled checks as exhibits to support their respective positions. Neither party objected to any of the factual statements presented by the other and neither proffered, or mentioned the need for oral testimony or formal introduction of exhibits. The arguments at the trial court hearing, cited by appellant as 'clear and timely objections' that 'the evidence was incompetent,' refer to the standard of proof required and are not objections to the type of evidence before the trial court. Accordingly, the documents submitted as the appellate record are proper 'evidence' in each of the two proceedings ... which constitute the consolidated appeal." (Evangelho, supra, 67 Cal.App.4th at pp. 620-621.)