Judge: Kevin C. Brazile, Case: 22STCV32792, Date: 2023-04-21 Tentative Ruling

Hearing Date: April 21, 2023

Case Name: Vartanian v. Vartanian, et al.

Case No.: 22STCV27277 

Matter: Motion for Trial Preference

Moving Party: Plaintiff Alexan Vartanian

Responding Party: Defendant Sandra Vartanian

Notice: OK

Ruling: The Motion for Trial Preference is granted.

Moving party to give notice.

If counsel do not submit on the tentative, they are strongly 

encouraged to appear by LACourtConnect rather than in person due to the COVID-19 pandemic. 

This is an action in which Plaintiff Alexan Vartanian alleges that his daughter, Defendant Sandra Vartanian, misled him to sign a power of attorney and that she subsequently transferred four pieces of real property from Plaintiff’s trust into her own trust. 

Plaintiff now seeks a trial preference under Code Civ. Proc. § 36(a), (e).  

Code Civ. Proc. § 36(a) states, “A party to a civil action who is over 70 years of age may petition the court for a preference, which the court shall grant if the court makes both of the following findings: (1) The party has a substantial interest in the action as a whole. (2) The health of the party is such that a preference is necessary to prevent prejudicing the party’s interest in the litigation.”

Plaintiff has shown that he (1) is 82 years old; (2) has a substantial interest in this action because this action relates to his real property; and (3) has kidney disease and hypertension that may prejudice his interest in this lawsuit.  On the last point, Plaintiff’s physician has submitted a declaration stating that Plaintiff “suffers from chronic kidney disease, high blood pressure and hyperlipidemia (high fatty acids in his blood)” and that there are “serious concerns about Mr. Vartanian's ability to participate in a meaningful way during a trial that is so far away and, possibly, even to survive to the trial date if his physical condition remains as it is or continues to deteriorate as it has during the past several months.”  Further, Plaintiff’s counsel states that he has “observed a marked overall decline in Mr. Vartanian's memory and ability to recall facts relating to his claims. I have also observed a physical decline in Mr. Vartanian.”  This evidence is sufficient such that Plaintiff is entitled to a trial preference.  

Defendant Sandra Vartanian argues that this Motion should be continued to the date of her application for a guardian ad litem for Plaintiff.  The Court, in the exercise of its discretion, denies this request.  A motion for reconsideration can be asserted if a guardian ad litem is necessary.  

The Motion is granted.  The Court will set a trial date within 120 days.  The objections are overruled.

Moving party to give notice.

If counsel do not submit on the tentative, they are strongly encouraged to appear by LACourtConnect rather than in person due to the COVID-19 pandemic.