Judge: Kerry Bensinger, Case: 24STCV14558, Date: 2024-11-27 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV14558    Hearing Date: November 27, 2024    Dept: 31

Tentative Ruling

Judge Kerry Bensinger, Department 31

HEARING DATE:     November 27, 2024                           TRIAL DATE:  Not set

CASE:                                Craig Forbes v. Ronald Kishok

CASE NO.:                 24STCV14558

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE

MOVING PARTY:               Intervenor, Carol A. Dekkers, Successor Trustee of the Kishok 1996 Living Trust

RESPONDING PARTY:     No opposition

I.          INTRODUCTION

On June 11, 2024, plaintiff Craig B. Forbes (Plaintiff) filed a Verified Complaint against defendant Ronald Kishok (Defendant) for (1) Breach of Personal Guaranty, (2) Deficiency Judgment, and (3) Quiet Title Judgment.  Plaintiff is self-represented.

As alleged in the Complaint, Defendant executed and delivered to Plaintiff a promissory note in the principal amount of $650,000. Pursuant to the terms of the Note, Defendant agreed to pay Plaintiff monthly payments of $6,513.02 in exchange for a loan.  To secure the payment, Defendant entered and delivered to Plaintiff a security agreement granting Plaintiff a first lien mortgage or deed of trust for the real property located at 6715 Tampa Avenue, Reseda, CA (the Property).  Defendant defaulted and refused to make the payment due thereunder.

On August 12, 2024, Plaintiff filed a Proof of Service of Summons which states he personally served Defendant on June 18, 2024.

On October 24, 2024, proposed intervenor Carol A. Dekkers, successor trustee of the Kishok 1996 Living Trust, filed this motion to intervene. 

            The motion is unopposed.

II.        LEGAL STANDARD

“An intervention takes place when a nonparty, deemed an intervenor, becomes a party to an action or proceeding between other persons by doing any of the following:

(1) Joining a plaintiff in claiming what is sought by the complaint.

(2) Uniting with a defendant in resisting the claims of a plaintiff.

(3) Demanding anything adverse to both a plaintiff and a defendant.”

(Code Civ. Proc. § 387, subd. (b).) 

“A nonparty shall petition the court for leave to intervene by noticed motion or ex parte application.  The petition shall include a copy of the proposed complaint in intervention or answer in intervention and set forth the grounds upon which intervention rests.”  (Code Civ. Proc. § 387, subd. (c).) 

“The court shall, upon timely application, permit a nonparty to intervene in the action or proceeding if either of the following conditions is satisfied: 

(A)¿A provision of law confers an unconditional right to intervene.

(B)¿The person seeking intervention claims an interest relating to the property or transaction that is the subject of the action and that person is so situated that the disposition of the action may impair or impede that person’s ability to protect that interest, unless that person’s interest is adequately represented by one or more of the existing parties.”  

(Code Civ. Proc. § 387, subd. (d)(1).)

If leave to intervene is granted by the court, the intervenor shall separately file the complaint in intervention and serve notice of the court’s decision to parties who have appeared. (Code Civ. Proc. § 387, subd. (e).) 

III.      DISCUSSION 

Proposed intervenor Carol A. Dekkers (Dekkers), in her capacity as the successor trustee of the Kishok 1996 Living Trust seeks leave to intervene in this action.  As she explains in her motion, Defendant executed the Kishok 1996 Living Trust in January of 1996.  Defendant designated himself as trustee and his niece, Monika A. Gunn (Gunn), as successor trustee, and Dekkers as alternate successor trustee.  On January 31, 2023, Defendant passed away.  On September 11, 2023, Gunn passed away.  Dekkers assumed her role as alternate successor trustee thereafter.   (Dekkers Decl., ¶¶ 2-3.)

In March of 2024, Dekkers initiated probate proceedings.  Her attorney informed Dekker of a suspicious trust recorded by Plaintiff which jeopardized the original terms of the Kishok 1996 Living Trust by appointing Plaintiff as successor trustee without mentioning the trustees identified in the Kishok 1996 Living Trust.  (Dekkers Decl., ¶ 5.)  Further, Plaintiff’s trust indicates he obtained a $270,000 loan secured against the trust estate.  (Paley Decl., ¶ 6.)

In July of 2024, Dekkers learned of this lawsuit.  She contends Plaintiff falsely claims that, among other things, Defendant owes Plaintiff $650,000 under a promissory note, (Dekkers Decl., ¶ 6), and that he personally served Defendant with process in June of 2024 despite Defendant having passed away in January of 2023.

Based on the foregoing, Dekkers argues intervention is necessary to protect the interests of the Kishok 1996 Living Trust.  The court agrees.  Dekkers establishes a clear interest in this litigation.  As trustee of Defendant’s Living Trust, Dekkers is obligated to protect trust assets.  (Prob. Code, §1600.)  Indeed, as trustee, Dekkers has the right to seek court intervention when trust assets are allegedly mishandled.  (Prob. Code, §16420.)  Further, Dekkers brought this motion soon after learning of this lawsuit.  (See People ex rel. Rominger v. County of Trinity (1983) 147 Cal.App.3d 655.  The motion is timely.

IV.       CONCLUSION        

            The unopposed motion is GRANTED.  Carol A. Dekkers, as successor trustee of the Kishok 1996 Living Trust, is ordered to serve and file her proposed Complaint-in-Intervention within five (5) court days of this Order.  

            Moving party to give notice.

Dated:   November 27, 2024