Judge: Stephen I. Goorvitch, Case: 21STCV23254, Date: 2023-01-23 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV23254    Hearing Date: January 23, 2023    Dept: 39

Will Lightburne v. Tony Bland, et al.
Case No. 21STCV23254

Motions for Summary Judgment

            The Court posts this tentative order in advance of the hearing.  The Court provides notice that if Defendants do not appear, either remotely or in-person, they shall waive the right to be heard, and the Court shall adopt this tentative order. 

            Plaintiff filed this complaint to enforce and collect money due on a Medi-Cal creditor’s claim, under Welfare and Institutions Code section 14009.5.  In brief, Plaintiff alleges as follows:  Barbara Harris, also known as Barbara Jean Harris, died on or about January 14, 2016, while in possession of real and personal property with an approximate value of $537,339.  (Complaint, ¶¶ 3, 20, 23.)  The Department of Health Care Services (the “Department”) paid for Ms. Harris’s healthcare through Medi-Cal.  (Complaint, ¶ 20.)  Specifically, the Department paid a total of $61,198.15 for Ms. Harris’s healthcare.  (Complaint, ¶ 21.)  Now, Plaintiff seeks payment of this amount plus costs and interest from Defendants Tony Bland and Steven Gant. 

Pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 14009.5 and California Code of Regulations, title 22, section 50961, when certain decedents have received health care services under Medi-Cal and payments for their health care premiums have been made under Medi-Cal, the Department shall claim reimbursement for these payments.  Reimbursement shall be claimed from the estate of the decedent or from any recipient of the decedent’s property by distribution or survival, and shall be in an amount equal to the payments for health care premiums and health care services provided to the decedent, or the value of the property received by any recipient from the decedent by distribution or survival, whichever is less.  Under Welfare and Institutions Code section 14009.5, the Department of Health Care Services may make a claim against a decedent’s estate for benefits paid on behalf of the decedent.  (See Bonta v. Burke (2002) 98 Cal.App.4th 788, 793.)

Plaintiff moves for summary judgment against both Tony Bland and Steven Gant.  “[T]he party moving for summary judgment bears the burden of persuasion that there is no triable issue of material fact and that he is entitled to judgment as a matter of law[.] There is a triable issue of material fact if, and only if, the evidence would allow a reasonable trier of fact to find the underlying fact in favor of the party opposing the motion in accordance with the applicable standard of proof.”  (Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 850.)  “[T]he party moving for summary judgment bears an initial burden of production to make a prima facie showing of the nonexistence of any triable issue of material fact; if he carries his burden of production, he causes a shift, and the opposing party is then subjected to a burden of production of his own to make a prima facie showing of the existence of a triable issue of material fact.”  (Ibid.)  

Plaintiff’s evidence establishes that the Department paid a total of $61,198.15 for Ms. Harris’s healthcare.  (See Plaintiff’s Compendium of Evidence, Exh. #100.)  Plaintiff’s evidence establishes that the Department has a valid claim against Ms. Harris’s estate.  (Id., Exh. #101.)  Under the version of Welfare and Institutions Code section 14009.5 effective at the time of Decedent’s death, Decedent’s estate “include[ed] probate and nonprobate transfers on death . . . .”  (Belshe v. Hope (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 161, 175.)  Property in a revocable inter vivos trust is part of the estate of the decedent under the version of Welfare and Institutions Code section 14009.5 effective at the time of Decedent’s death.  (Bonta v. Burke (2002) 98 Cal.App.4th 788, 791-792.)

The primary asset in Decedent’s estate was certain real property.  (See Plaintiff’s Compendium of Evidence, Exh, #107.)  As of the time of Ms. Harris’s death, the real property at issue was held in the Barbara Harris Revocable Living Trust.  After her death, Defendant Tony Bland, who is also known as “Maurice Anthony Bland,” was trustee of the Barbara Harris Revocable Living Trust.  (See Plaintiff’s Compendium of Evidence, Exh. #110.)  Defendant Tony Bland transferred title of the property to his brother, Defendant Steven Gant.  (Ibid.)  Defendant Steven Gant admits that he received this asset from his mother’s estate.  (See Plaintiff’s Compendium of Evidence, Exh. #107.)  Therefore, Plaintiff has satisfied its burden on summary judgment with respect to Defendant Steven Gant. 

Plaintiff has also satisfied its burden on summary judgment with respect to Defendant Tony Bland.  After Ms. Harris died, there was a question of ownership of the property.  (See Plaintiff’s Compendium of Evidence, Exh, #105.)  Defendant Steven Gant took the position that Ms. Harris intended that he inherit the property.  (Ibid.)  Defendant Tony Bland agreed to release any legal and equitable claims for the property and quitclaim “whatever ownership interest he may have in the Subject Property to Gant” in exchange for $100,000 after refinancing the property.  (Ibid.)  This evidence establishes that Defendant Tony Bland received an asset—an interest in Ms. Harris’s property—for which he was compensated $100,000. 

            This evidence is sufficient to satisfy Plaintiff’s burden, shifting the burden to Defendants to proffer sufficient evidence giving rise to a triable issue.  They fail to do so.  Therefore, the orders as follows:

            1.         Plaintiff’s motions for summary judgment against Defendant Tony Bland and Defendant Steven Gant are granted.

            2.         Plaintiff shall prepare and lodge a proposed judgment against both defendants, jointly and severally.

            3.         Plaintiff’s counsel shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.