Judge: Mark C. Kim, Case: 21LBCV00382, Date: 2022-09-13 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21LBCV00382    Hearing Date: September 13, 2022    Dept: S27

1.     Background Facts

Plaintiff, Scott A. Burchard, individually and as Trustee of the Pamela Lilla Seager Revocable Trust and as Trustee of the Scott Andrew Burchard Revocable Trust, filed this action against Defendants, Pamela Lilla Seager and Donald Henry Segretti.  Plaintiff filed the action on 7/15/21 and filed his operative FAC on 3/02/22.  The FAC includes causes of action for:

Quiet Title (All Defendants);

Declaratory Relief (All Defendants);

Professional Negligence (Segretti);

Breach of Contract (Segretti);

Fraud (Segretti).

Plaintiff alleges he and Seager were married and hired Segretti, an attorney, to create trusts to protect their interests and create an estate plan.  Plaintiff alleges Seager died in 2019, and Plaintiff again hired Segretti to create estate documents.  In December of 2020, Plaintiff learned Segretti had failed to create trust documents relating to the subject property that reflected his and Seager’s wishes, and the property remained titled in the name of Seager, an unmarried woman.    

2.     Motion to Stay Action

Segretti seeks to stay all claims against him pending resolution of the claims against the other defendants.  Segretti contends all claims against him sound in professional negligence, and the claims will only be ripe if and when Plaintiff’s claims against the remaining defendants are resolved.  Notably, while the first (quiet title) and second (declaratory relief) causes of action are pled against “all defendants,” the body of those claims makes clear that they are actually asserted against Seager and her trust, as well as unknown persons, but not against Segretti.

The Court has broad discretion to issue a partial or complete stay of litigation. See Western Steel & Ship Repair, Inc. v. RMI, Inc. (1986) 53 Cal.3d 257, 267, holding that trial courts have broad discretion to control the litigation before them.  Segretti adequately showed that a resolution of the claims regarding ownership and title of the subject property should be resolved before any malpractice-based claims are ripe against him, as Plaintiff’s damages, if any, cannot be determined unless and until the property-based claims are resolved.  Any opposition to the motion was due on or before 8/30/22.  The Court has not received timely opposition to the motion.  Because Segretti met his moving burden to show he is entitled to the relief sought, and because there is no opposition to the motion, the motion is granted.

The FSC and trial dates of 11/03/22 and 11/14/22 remain on calendar, but will go forward between Plaintiff and all defendants other than Segretti.  The Court also schedules a status conference re: status of case against Segretti for Wednesday, 12/14/22, one month after the trial date. 

Segretti is ordered to give notice.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court at gdcdepts27@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  If the department does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be placed off calendar.  If a party submits on the tentative, the party’s email must include the case number and must identify the party submitting on the tentative. If any party does not submit on the tentative, the party should make arrangements to appear remotely at the hearing on this matter.