Superior Court of California 

County of Los Angeles – West District  

Beverly Hills Courthouse / Department 200 

 

 

BACKGROUND 

This case involves a dispute over parking spaces.  Plaintiffs George C. Kopek, Toni Kopek and Richard Lee live in a condominium building in Pacific Palisades and claim ownership of two parking spaces, G114 and G116.  They contend Defendants Bagram and Susanna Mardirossian are illegally occupying the spaces.  They have also sued their home owners association, Casa Gateway Homeowners Association (“Casa Gateway”), for failing to enforce bylaws and a Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R’s). Their complaint alleges claims for ejectment, preliminary injunction, trespass, nuisance, quiet title and enforcement of “governing documents”.  

This hearing is on Plaintiff/Cross Defendant Toni Kopek’s motion to substitute as successor in interest to the claims of Plaintiff/Cross Defendant George Kopek, who is recently deceased.  Toni Kopek is the sister of George Kopek and holds legal title as a joint tenant with rights of survivorship to the unit and garage space at issue in this case.              

LEGAL STANDARD 

“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 . . . and an action may be commenced by the decedent’s personal representatives or, if none, by the decedent’s successor in interest.”¿ (Code of Civ. Proc., § 377.30.)  After the death of a plaintiff, the court, on motion, shall allow a¿pending action that does not abate to be continued by the decedent’s personal representative or successor-in-interest.¿ (Code of Civ. Proc., § 377.31.)¿ 

“For¿the purposes of this chapter, ‘decedent's successor in interest’¿means 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 a cause of action.”  (Code of Civ. Proc., § 377.11.)  “For¿the purposes of this chapter, ‘beneficiary of the decedent’s estate’¿means:¿(a) If the decedent died leaving a will, the sole beneficiary or all of the beneficiaries who succeed to a cause of action, or to a particular item of property that is the subject of a cause of action, under the decedent’s will.” (Code of Civ. Proc., § 377.10.) 

The person who seeks to commence or continue a pending action as the decedent’s successor-in-interest shall execute and file an affidavit or declaration stating: (1) the decedent’s name;¿(2) the date and place of decedent’s death;¿(3) “No proceeding is now pending in California for administration of the decedent’s estate;” (4) a copy of the final order showing the distribution of the decedent’s cause of action to the successor-in-interest, if the decedent’s estate was administered;¿(5) either the affiant or declarant is the decedent’s successor in interest or the affiant or declarant is authorized to act on behalf of the decedent’s successor in interest, with facts in support thereof;¿(6) “No other person has a superior right to commence the action or proceeding or to be substituted for the decedent in the pending action or proceeding;” and (7) the statements are true, under penalty of perjury. (Code of Civ. Proc., § 377.32(a).)  “A certified copy of the decedent's death certificate shall be attached to the affidavit or declaration.”¿(Code of Civ. Proc., § 377.32(c).) 

EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS 

The Court overrules Defendants’ objections to the Declarations of Richard Lee and Toni Kopek.   

DISCUSSION 

The Court finds that Toni Kopek’s declaration satisfies the requirements of Civ. Proc. Code § 377.32(a).  The declaration provides the following information: The decedent’s name, George Kopek. (T. Kopek Decl. ¶ 2.) The date and place of the decedent's death were November 17, 2022 in Santa Monica, California. (T. Kopek Decl. ¶ 3.)  No proceeding is now pending in California for administration of the decedent’s estate. (T. Kopek Decl. ¶ 4.) The declarant is the decedent’s¿successor in interest. (T. Kopek Decl. ¶ 5.)  No other person has a¿superior right to be substituted for the decedent in the pending action; George Kopek has never been married and was single at the time of his death. (T. Kopek Decl. ¶ 6.)  Toni Kopek is a co-owner and joint tenant of the property at issue.  (T. Kopek Decl. ¶ 5; Ex. C to Lee Decl.)  Finally, Ms. Kopek declares under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. (T. Kopek Decl. lines 21-23.) 

Defendants argue that as to the claims for quiet title and ejectment, the declaration is insufficient and Ms. Kopek should have attached a copy of the deed which is the best evidence that she is a joint tenant with her brother.  While the Court disagrees with Defendants’ position that Ms. Kopek’s declaration that she is a joint tenant constitutes inadmissible hearsay, the reply papers attach the deed which shows Ms. Kopek is a joint tenant in the property at issue.  Defendants concede that if Ms. Kopek were to submit the deed, they would have no valid objections to the motion to substitute as to the claims for quiet title and ejectment.   

However, Defendants argue that as to the remaining causes of action, such as trespass or nuisance, Ms. Kopek has presented no evidence that she is the successor in interest.  The Court disagrees.  Code Civ. Proc. § 377.11 defines “decedent’s successor in interest” to include someone who “succeed[s] the cause of action or to a particular item of the property that is the subject of the cause of action.”  Here, Plaintiff is undisputedly the joint tenant and succeeds to the property that is the subject of all the causes of action in this case.     

CONCLUSION 

Based on the foregoing, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff Toni Kopek’s motion to substitute as successor in interest to George Kopek’s claims in this case.     

 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 

DATED: March 8, 2023 ___________________________ 

Edward B. Moreton, Jr. 

Judge of the Superior Court