Judge: Kerry Bensinger, Case: 20STCV07754, Date: 2023-11-09 Tentative Ruling

Counsel may submit on the tentative ruling by emailing Dept. 31 before 8:30 the morning of the hearing. The email address is smcdept31@lacourt.org. Please do not call the court to submit on the tentative. Please do not submit to the tentative ruling on behalf of the opposing party. Please do not e-mail the Court if you plan to appear and argue.

In deciding whether to submit on the tentative ruling or attend the hearing and present oral argument, please keep the following in mind:

The tentative rulings authored by this court reflect that the court has read and considered all pleadings and evidence timely submitted to the court in connection with the motion, opposition, and reply (if any). Because the pleadings were filed, they are part of the public record.

Oral argument is not an opportunity to simply regurgitate that which a party set forth in its pleadings. Nor, is oral argument an opportunity to "make a record" when there is no court reporter present and the statements and arguments of counsel are already part of the record because they were set forth in the pleadings. Finally, simply because a party or attorney disagrees with the court's analysis and ruling or is not satisfied with it does not necessarily warrant oral argument when no new arguments will be articulated.

If you submit on the tentative, you must immediately notify all other parties email that you will not appear at the hearing. If you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may nevertheless appear at the hearing and argue the motions. If all parties to the motion submit, this tentative ruling will become the final ruling after the hearing date and it will be memorialized in a minute order. This tentative ruling is not an invitation, nor an opportunity, to file further documents relative to the hearing in question. No such document will be considered by the Court.

**Tentative rulings on Motions for Summary Judgment will only be available for review in the courtroom on the day of the hearing.

Case Number: 20STCV07754    Hearing Date: November 9, 2023    Dept: 31

Tentative Ruling

Judge Kerry Bensinger, Department 31

HEARING DATE:     November 9, 2023                             TRIAL DATE:  Vacated

CASE:                                Telma Yolanda Hernandez Ramirez, et al. v. Hobart Portfolio, LLC, et al.

CASE NO.:                 20STCV07754

MOTION FOR ORDER SUBSTITUTING SARAH REESE

FOR PLAINTIFF GAVIN MCCARROLL

MOVING PARTY:               Petitioner Sarah Reese

RESPONDING PARTY:     No opposition

I.          BACKGROUND

            This is a breach of habitability action filed by the tenants of 920 S. Hobart Boulevard in Los Angeles, California, against Defendants, L.A. Portfolio Management I, LLC and Hobart Portfolio.

            On June 26, 2023, Gavin McCarroll, a plaintiff in this action, passed away.

            On October 11, 2023, Petitioner, Sarah Reese, Mr. McCarroll’s only surviving child, filed this motion for an order substituting herself as Mr. McCarroll’s Successor-in-Interest. 

            The motion is unopposed.

II.        LEGAL STANDARD

            “A pending action or proceeding does not abate by the death of a party if the cause of action survives.”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 377.21.)  “On motion after the death of a person who commenced an action or proceeding, the court shall allow a pending action or proceeding that does not abate to be continued by the decedent’s personal representative or, if none, by the decedent’s successor in interest.”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 377.31.)  

            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 shall execute and file an affidavit or a declaration under penalty of perjury under the laws of this state stating: (1) The decedent’s name, (2) The date and place of the decedent’s death, (3) “No proceeding is now pending in California for administration of the decedent’s estate,” (4) If the decedent’s estate was administered, a copy of the final order showing the distribution of the decedent’s cause of action to the successor in interest, (5) Either of the following, as appropriate, 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 Civ. Proc., § 377.32.)  

            A certified copy of the decedent’s death certificate shall be attached to the affidavit or declaration.¿ (Code Civ. Proc., § 377.32, subd. (c).) 

III.      DISCUSSION

            Upon review of the papers, the Court finds the Declaration of Sarah Reese complies with the requirements of Code of Civil Procedure section 377.32.  Accordingly, Petitioner makes a sufficient showing that she is Mr. McCarroll’s successor-in-interest.

IV.       CONCLUSION 

The unopposed motion is GRANTED.  Sarah Reese is substituted as Plaintiff Gavin McCarroll’s Successor-in-Interest.

Moving party to give notice. 

Dated:   November 9, 2023                                      ___________________________________

                                                                                    Kerry Bensinger

                                                                                    Judge of the Superior Court