Judge: Lee S. Arian, Case: 20STCV16466, Date: 2024-01-17 Tentative Ruling



Case Number: 20STCV16466    Hearing Date: January 17, 2024    Dept: 27

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

 

LARRY WAFER and MICHELLE ROSSER,

                    Plaintiffs,

          vs.

 

ABY HOLDINGS, LLC; ATZ PROPERTIES LLC; and DOES 1 to 50, inclusive,

 

                    Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

     CASE NO.: 20STCV16466

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF LARRY WAFER’S MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF A SPECIAL ADMINISTRATOR

 

Dept. 27

1:30 p.m.

January 17, 2024

 

I.            INTRODUCTION

On April 30, 2020, Plaintiffs Larry Wafer (“Decedent”) and Michelle Rosser filed a complaint against Defendants Aby Holdings, LLC; ATZ Properties LLC (“Defendants”); and DOES 1 to 50, inclusive for (1) general negligence and (2) premises liability. The complaint alleges on or about May 19, 2018, the ceiling of the bathroom and/or shower collapsed and fell on Plaintiffs.

          On January 31, 2022, Decedent passed away from causes unrelated to this instant action.

          On November 16, 2023, Decedent, by and through his attorney Anthony Werbin, Esq., filed a motion for appointment of a special administrator. An opposition was due on January 4, 2024, and none has been filed. As such, no reply has been filed.

 

II.          LEGAL STANDARD

Pursuant California Probate Code section 8540, subdivision (a), “If the circumstances of the estate require the immediate appointment of a personal representative, the court may appoint a special administrator to exercise any powers that may be appropriate under the circumstances for the preservation of the estate.” (Prob. Code, § 8540, subd. (a).)

“Appointment of a special administrator may be made at any time without notice or on such notice to interested persons as the court deems reasonable.” (Prob. Code, § 8541, subd. (a).)

Further, “[t]he court in which an action is commenced or continued under this article may make any order concerning parties that is appropriate to ensure proper administration of justice in the case, including appointment of the decedent’s successor in interest as a special administrator or guardian ad litem.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 377.33.)

III.        DISCUSSION

Plaintiff Larry Wafer (“Decedent”), by and through his attorney Anthony Werbin, Esq., moves for an order appointing Cameron Wafer as a special administrator on the grounds that Decedent passed away on January 31, 2022, and his pending action survives, requiring the appointment of a special administrator. The motion contends Defense counsel is not opposed to this present motion.

The motion makes the following arguments: (1) Cameron Wafer is the most qualified living family member to Decedent to act as a special administrator because Decedent was not married and had no children; (2) there is no personal representative in the matter pending before this Court; and (3) Decedent passed having left no will or other instrument regarding the disposition of his property or possessions. (Werbin Decl., ¶¶ 2-5, Exh. 1.)

Here, the Decedent was a party to this proceeding and this action is still pending. Furthermore, Decedent passed away intestate and was neither married nor had any children. Also, Cameron Wafer is the Decedent’s brother, thus the most qualified living family member to act as a special administrator. Accordingly, the motion is GRANTED.

IV.        CONCLUSION

Plaintiff Larry Wafer (“Decedent”), by and through his attorney Anthony Werbin, Esq.’s motion for appointment of special administrator is GRANTED.

 

Moving party to give notice.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SSCDEPT27@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  Please be advised that 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 matter.  Unless you receive a submission from all other parties in the matter, you should assume that others might appear at the hearing to argue.  If the Court does not receive emails from the parties indicating submission on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may, at its discretion, adopt the tentative as the final order or place the motion off calendar.

Dated this 17th day of January 2024

 

 

 

 

Hon. Lee S. Arian

Judge of the Superior Court