Judge: Joel L. Lofton, Case: 22AHCV00431, Date: 2022-12-16 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22AHCV00431    Hearing Date: December 16, 2022    Dept: X

   Tentative Ruling

Judge Joel L. Lofton, Department X

HEARING DATE:     December 16, 2022                             TRIAL DATE: No date set.

CASE:                         CITY OF DUARTE, a California Municipal Corporation, v. DANIEL L. NEWMAN, an individual; LEE C. NEWMAN, an individual; ZELMA R. NEWMAN, an individual; ALL PERSONS UNKNOWN CLAIMING A LEGAL INTEREST IN THE REAL PROPERTY COMMONLY DESCRIBED AS 1307 BLOOMDALE STREET, DUARTE, CALIFORNIA 91010; and DOES 1 through 50. 

CASE NO.:                 22AHCV00431

EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF THE RECEIVERSHIP PLAN AND INCREASE IN RECEIVER’S CERTIFICATE FUNDING

MOVING PARTY:               Receiver Richardson Griswold

RESPONDING PARTY:      No response filed.

SERVICE:                              Filed December 13, 2022

RELIEF REQUESTED

            Receiver Richardson Griswold (“Receiver” or “the Receiver”) files this ex parte application for approval of the receivership plan and for an increase in the receiver’s certificate funding. 

BACKGROUND

             This case arises out of Plaintiff the City of Duarte’s (“City” or “the City”) claim for nuisance abatement and receivership against Defendants Daniel L. Newman (“Occupant”), Lee C. Newman, and Zelma R. Newman (“Defendants”) for real property located at 1307 Bloomdale Street, Duarte, California 91010 (“Subject Property”). The City alleges that the recorded title owners are Lee C. Newman and Zelma R. Newman (“Deceased Owners”), who are both believed to be deceased.

            The City alleges the Subject Property is a severely dilapidated single-family residential structure. The City alleges that the Subject Property has a history of unsafe and unsanitary conditions. The City alleges that specifically on February 23, 20022, an inspection of the property identified 67 substantially dangerous and hazardous conditions in violation of various statutes, regulations, and ordinances. On March 28, 2022, the City issued a Notice and Order to Repair or Abate. On April 1, 2022, the City recorded a Notice of Pendency of Action to Abate Nuisance. On April 18, 2022, the City entered into a compliance agreement with the Occupant. On May 23, 2-22, the City observed that all of the exterior violations remained on the Subject Property.

TENTATIVE RULING

            The Receiver’s ex parte application for approval of the receivership plan is GRANTED.

            Receiver’s request to increase the amount of the receivership certificate to a maximum of $76,000 secured by super-priority liens is GRANTED.

DISCUSSION

            The Receiver provides that on November 22, 2022, an inspection was conducted of the Subject Property. (Griswold Decl. ¶ 10.) The Receiver provides that based on the accumulation of personal belongs, trash, and debris, he recommends a two-phase rehabilitation plan. (Id. ¶ 12.) The first proposed phase is a complete cleaning of the interior and exterior of the Subject Property. (Id. ¶ 13.) The second phase would involve further inspections to identify any outstanding violations and a further report. (Ibid.)

            The Receiver provides that the costs of phase one include: (1) $24,250 for cleaning services to be provided by Decon-1; (2) $3,700 reserved for construction contingency; (3) $6,200 for security services provided by Corporate Alliance Strategies, Inc. (“CAS”) for patrols of the property over four months; (4) $3,200 for relocation assistance for Occupant; (5) $5,770.69 for property insurance; and (6) $7,500 for receivership fees and maintenance costs. (Griswold Decl. ¶ 23.) The Receiver requests approval to increase the existing receivership certificate authority from $25,000 to a maximum of $76,000, or a $51,000 increase. (Ibid.)

            The Receiver asserts that exigent circumstances exist justifying ex parte relief because of the hazardous conditions on the Subject Property and the concern of unlawful trespassing. The Receiver also provides that CAS has started patrolling the property beginning on December 1, 2022, at a cost of $1,550 per month. (Id. ¶ 16.)

            “Courts also have substantial discretion to authorize a receiver to borrow money to fund the preservation and management of property in the receivership estate, particularly where, as here, the estate does not produce income. In that circumstance, the receiver may ask the court to authorize the issuance of a receiver's certificate to the lender as security for money loaned to the estate. Typically, such a receivership certificate will have priority over all other liens—even preexisting liens.” (City of Sierra Madre v. SunTrust Mortgage, Inc. (2019) 32 Cal.App.5th 648, 657.)

            The Receiver has demonstrated the need for shorter notice for his request. Further, based on the Receiver’s representation, the Receiver’s request to increase the amount of the receivership certificate to a maximum of $76,000 secured by super-priority liens is granted.

CONCLUSION

            The Receiver’s ex parte application for approval of the receivership plan is GRANTED.

            Receiver’s request to increase the amount of the receivership certificate to a maximum of $76,000 secured by super-priority liens is GRANTED.

Dated:   December 16, 2022                           ___________________________________

                                                                                    Joel L. Lofton

                                                                                    Judge of the Superior Court

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court indicating their

intention to submit.  Parties intending to appear are strongly encouraged to appear remotely.  alhdeptx@lacourt.org