Judge: Lee S. Arian, Case: 20STCV39983, Date: 2023-11-28 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV39983    Hearing Date: November 28, 2023    Dept: 27

Tentative Ruling

 

Judge Lee S. Arian, Department 27

 

 

HEARING DATE:     November 28, 2023                TRIAL DATE: December 19, 2023

                                                          

CASE:                                Johnnie Valencia and Evelia Valencia v. Los Angeles World Airports,  et al.

 

CASE NO.:                 20STCV39983

 

 

MOTION FOR SUBSTITUTION OF SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST

 

     

 

MOVING PARTY:               Petitioner Evalia Valencia

 

RESPONDING PARTY:     Defendants Los Angeles World Airports; Roderick W. Hammer; DOES 1-10

 

I.          BACKGROUND

 

            On October 19, 2020, Evalia Valencia (“Evalia”) and Johnnie Valencia (“Johnnie”) (collectively “Plaintiffs”) filed this action against Defendants Los Angeles World Airports (“LAWA”), Roderick W. Hammer (“Hammer”), and DOES 1-10 (collectively “Defendants”), for injuries and damages Plaintiffs allegedly sustained because of Defendants’ alleged negligent acts.

 

            On January 3, 2021, Plaintiff Johnnie Valencia passed away.

 

            On October 2, 2023, Petitioner Evelia Valencia filed this motion for an order to substitute herself as Johnnie’s successor in interest.  Defendants Roderick W. Hammer and the City of Los Angeles oppose, but only on the basis that they need more time to conduct discovery.[1]

 

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

 

            Petitioner seeks an order substituting herself as Plaintiff’s successor in interest.  In support, Petitioner submits a declaration that complies with Code of Civil Procedure section 377.32.  Petitioner declares that she is Plaintiff’s widow.[2] 

 

            Citing Code of Civil Procedure section 377.33, which states in part that “the court in which an action is commenced or continued under this article may make any order concerning parties that is appropriate to ensure property administration of justice in the case,” Defendants argue that after the Successor in Interest has been appointed and the supplemental complaint is responded to, that the matter be scheduled for a Trial Setting Conference to ensure that Defendants have the necessary discovery to prepare for trial or hearing. Section 377.33 does not bar Petitioner’s motion. Accordingly, with no real opposition, the Motion is appropriately granted. 

 

In light of Defendants’ request to have the trial in this case continued and discovery continued as well, the Court will hear from the parties at the hearing on this matter regarding that issue.

 

IV.  CONCLUSION 

 

The Motion for Substitution of Successor In Interest of Deceased Plaintiff is GRANTED.  The parties are to appear at the hearing to discuss discovery and trial dates.

 

Moving party to give notice. 

 

 

 

 

 

Dated:   November 28, 2023                   ___________________________________

                                                                                    Lee S. Arian

                                                                                    Judge of the Superior Court

 

            . 



[1] Defendants Hammer and City of Los Angeles  have no opposition to Plaintiff Evelia being appointed the successor of interest of Plaintiff Johnnie Valencia. However, they argue that they were not served until April 2022 for the City and August 2022 for Hammer, so they did not have time to conduct sufficient discovery. Thus, they request a trial setting conference if this motion is granted since the trial is 21 days out. 

[2] Petitioner attached a copy of Plaintiff’s death certificate to her declaration. A certified copy of the decedent’s death certificate shall be attached to the affidavit or declaration.¿ (Code Civ. Proc., § 377.32, subd. (c).)  Plaintiff’s passing does not appear to be a contested issue.