Judge: Anne Hwang, Case: 22STCV04484, Date: 2024-03-08 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV04484    Hearing Date: March 8, 2024    Dept: 32

PLEASE NOTE:   Parties are encouraged to meet and confer concerning this tentative ruling to determine if a resolution may be reached.  If the parties are unable to reach a resolution and a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling, the party must send an email to the Court at sscdept32@lacourt.org indicating that party’s intention to submit.  The email shall include the case number, date and time of the hearing, counsel’s contact information (if applicable), and the identity of the party submitting on this tentative ruling.  If the Court does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may place the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court.  If all parties do not submit on this tentative ruling, they should arrange to appear in-person or remotely.  Further, after the Court has posted/issued a tentative ruling, the Court has the inherent authority to prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion and adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court. 

TENTATIVE RULING

MOTIONS

Plaintiff The Estate of Santana B. Holcomb (“Plaintiff”) moves for an order pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 377.31, substituting Beatrice Darcel Burkhalter, decedent Santana B. Holcomb’s daughter, in her capacity as successor in interest to the deceased Plaintiff, under Code of Civil Procedure Section 377.11.

ANALYSIS

California Code of Civil Procedure section 377.31 provides that the decedent’s personal representative or, if none, the decedent’s successor in interest may continue a decedent’s pending action. (Code Civ. Proc., § 377.30; see Adams v. Superior Court (2011) 196 Cal.App.4th 71, 78-79.) A successor in interest is the beneficiary of the decedent’s estate or other successor in interest who succeeds to a cause of action or to a particular item of the property that is the subject of the cause of action. (Code Civ. Proc., § 377.11.) Section 377.33 provides that the court in which an action is continued may make any order concerning parties that is appropriate to ensure proper administration of justice, including the appointment of the decedent’s successor in interest as a special administrator or guardian ad litem. 

Section 377.32 provides that a person who seeks to commence such an action as the decedent’s successor in interest must file an affidavit or declaration providing certain information, including the decedent’s name, date and place of decedent’s death, and statements regarding whether the estate has been administered and that the affiant or declarant is the successor in interest on decedent’s claim. (Id., § 377.32(a).) A certified copy of the decedent’s death certificate must also be attached to the affidavit or declaration. (Id., § 377.32(c).)

Plaintiff gives conflicting information in this motion and in the complaint. According to the complaint filed February 4, 2022, Santana Holcomb was already alleged to be deceased. (Complaint ¶ 2.) The Complaint was brought by Cynthia Holcomb, individually and as successor in interest. A motion to substitute a party as a successor in interest under Code of Civil Procedure section 377.31 is only applicable where the Plaintiff dies after filing the action.

However, “[a] cause of action that survives the death of the person entitled to commence an action or proceeding passes to the decedent's successor in interest, subject to Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 7000) of Part 1 of Division 7 of the Probate Code, and an action may be commenced by the decedent's personal representative or, if none, by the decedent's successor in interest.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 377.30.)  

The person who seeks to commence an action or proceeding or to continue a pending action or proceeding as the decedent's successor in interest under this article, must execute a declaration pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 377.32. However, this declaration is not required prior to commencing the action. (Parsons v. Tickner (1995) 31 Cal.App.4th 1513, 1523–24.)  

There has been no prior motion to substitute a party as Plaintiff’s successor in interest. Therefore, to the extent that Plaintiff seeks to substitute Beatrice Darcel Burkhalter to commence this action, Plainitff set forth the following facts.

Santana B. Holcomb passed away on February 23, 2021. A certified copy of Plaintiff’s death certificate has been attached. (Bauman Decl. ¶ 5, Exh. A.) The death certificate states that Cynthia Sue Holcomb, a plaintiff in this case, was decedent’s spouse and that he was married at the time of death. This conflicts with information in the motion which states that Santana was single. (Bauman Decl. ¶ 6.) Moreover, the case caption of the complaint indicates “Cynthia Holcomb, individually and as Successor-in-Interest to the Estate of Santana Holcomb.”

Beatrice Darcel Burkhalter has filed a declaration, under penalty of perjury, that she is Plaintiff’s sole successor in interest. Santana Holcomb’s surviving sons have also submitted declarations giving up rights to be successors in interest for this case. However, though Beatrice declares that no other person has a superior right to commence this action, there is no explanation of plaintiff Cynthia Sue Holcomb, who appears to be Decedent’s spouse.

Therefore, because Plaintiff has not shown that Beatrice is the sole successor in interest,[1]  the motion to substitute is denied.  

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Therefore, the Court DENIES the motion to substitute Beatrice Darcel Burkhalter as successor in interest.

Moving Party shall give notice of the Court’s orders, and file a proof of service of such.