Judge: Douglas W. Stern, Case: 22STCV37398, Date: 2023-12-28 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV37398    Hearing Date: December 28, 2023    Dept: 68

Kathryn Barger Leibrich vs. Richards D. Barger, et al., 22STCV37398

Motion to Compel Defendants to Provide Information and Assistance to Partition Referee

Moving Party: Plaintiff Kathryn Barger Leibrich

Background

            Plaintiff Kathryn Barger Leibrich (Plaintiff) filed this motion to compel Defendants to provide information and assistance to partition referee pursuant to CCP §§ 872.120 and 872.130. The partition referee has requested that Defendants Richards D. Barger and James F. Barger (Defendants) provide her with information regarding the subject property, such as the outstanding balance on the mortgage, the rent roll, property tax records, etc. The partition referee also wants to schedule an in-person inspection of the property and have it appraised before it is listed for sale. Defendants haves ignored the referee’s requests and have not cooperated. Plaintiff is requesting that the court enter an order compelling Defendants to provide the referee with (1) the information she has requested by a certain date; and (2) provide the referee with all other assistance she may reasonably require, such as arranging for her to inspect the property.

            In their opposition, Defendants claim that they did not respond to the partition referee’s requests because they believed that the information was equally available to Plaintiff and that Plaintiff would be providing the information. Defendants’ opposition has provided the name and contact information of the property manager of the 33^rd Street property, a Jay Park.

            In her reply, Plaintiff points out that Defendants have admitted that they did not provide information to the partition referee. She also argues that Defendants are trying to deflect the blame onto Plaintiff.

Analysis

CCP § 872.120 states in pertinent part that “the court… may make any decrees and orders necessary or incidental to carrying out” a partition action. Further, CCP § 872.130(c) empowers the Court to issue “temporary restraining orders and injunctions, with or without bond, for the purpose of…[r]estraining unlawful interference with a partition of the property ordered by the court.”

Regardless of whether the information was also available to Plaintiff, the partition referee also directed her requests to Defendants. Defendants should have complied with the partition referees requests, rather than ignoring them and pushing the blame onto Plaintiff.

The Court urges the parties to act in good faith and not impede or delay the partition referee.  The Court reminds the parties that it may adjust the costs and charges appropriately based on the actions of the parties that may impose costs or delay on the partition process, as may be authorized by law.

Plaintiff’s motion to compel Defendants to provide information to the partition referee is granted.

Order

1.      Defendants are ordered to comply with the referee’s requests and provide her with the information that she has requested within 20 days.

2.      Defendants are ordered to provide the partition referee with any other assistance that she may require to effectuate the partition of the property.