Judge: Upinder S. Kalra, Case: 22STCV09889, Date: 2022-12-15 Tentative Ruling

1. If you wish to submit on the tentative ruling, please email the clerk at SMCdept51@lacourt.org (and “cc” all other parties in the same email) and notify all other parties in advance that you will not be appearing at the hearing.  Include the word "SUBMISSION" in all caps in the subject line and include your name, contact information, the case number, and the party you represent in the body of the email. If you do not have access to the internet, you may call the clerk at (213) 633-0351.

If you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may nevertheless appear and argue the motion, and the Court may decide not to adopt the tentative ruling. Please note that the tentative ruling is not an invitation, nor an opportunity, to file any further documents relative to the hearing in question which are not authorized by statute or Rule of Court.

2. For any motion where no parties submit to the tentative ruling in advance, and no parties appear at the motion hearing, the Court may elect to either adopt the tentative ruling or take the motion off calendar, in its discretion.

3. DO NOT USE THE ABOVE EMAIL FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN TO SUBMIT TO A TENTATIVE RULING.  The Court will not read or respond to emails sent to this address for any other purpose.

Case Number: 22STCV09889    Hearing Date: December 15, 2022    Dept: 51

Tentative Ruling

Judge Upinder S. Kalra, Department 51

HEARING DATE:   December 15, 2022                                        

CASE NAME:           Jose Ramirez Bautista v. Perry Motors of National City, LLC dba Perry Chrysler Dodge Jeep Ram of National City

CASE NO.:                22STCV09889

MOTION TO APPOINT SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff Jose Ramirez Bautista

RESPONDING PARTY(S): None as of December 12, 2022

REQUESTED RELIEF:

1.      An order appointing Beatriz Ramirez as Successor-in-Interest of Plaintiff Jose Ramirez Bautista

TENTATIVE RULING:

1.      Motion for Order Appointing Beatriz Ramirez as Successor-in-Interest of Plaintiff Jose Ramirez Bautista is GRANTED.

STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS AND/OR PROCEEDINGS:

On March 22, 2022, Plaintiff Jose Ramirez Bautista (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Defendant Perry Motors of National City, LLC and FCA US LLC (“Defendants.”) The complaint alleged four complaints: (1) Violation of Song-Beverly Act – Breach of Express Warranty, (2) Violation of Song-Beverly Act – Breach of Implied Warranty, (3) Violation of Song-Beverly Act Section 1793.2, and (4) Negligent Repair. Plaintiff alleges that they entered into a warranty contact with Defendant FCA for the Subject Vehicle. However, the Subject Vehicle contained defects and was not fit for ordinary purpose. Additionally, Plaintiff brought the Subject Vehicle into Defendant Perry Motors, but Defendant was unable to conform the Subject Vehicle to the warranty.

On April 28, 2022, Defendant FCA US LLC, filed a Notice of Motion to Compel Arbitration.

On August 12, 2022, Plaintiff filed the current Motion for Order Appointing Beatriz Ramirez as Successor-in-Interest of Plaintiff Jose Ramirez Bautista. No opposition was filed as of December 12, 2022.

LEGAL STANDARD:

Following the death of a party, any legal action by that party may only proceed upon substitution of the decedent’s personal representative or successor in interest in her place.  (Code Civ. Proc. §§ 377.31, 367.)  California Code of Civil Procedure section 377.31 states that, “[o]n 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.” 

California Code of Civil Procedure section 377.32, subdivision (a) states:  “The person who seeks . . . to continue a pending action or proceeding as the decedent’s successor in interest under this article, shall execute and file an affidavit or a declaration under penalty of perjury under the laws of this state stating all of the following: 

(1) The decedent’s name. 

(2) The date and place of 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: 

(A) ‘The affiant or declarant is the decedent’s successor in interest (as defined in Section 377.11 of the California Code of Civil Procedure) and succeeds to the decedent’s interest in the action or proceeding.’ 

(B) ‘The affiant or declarant is authorized to act on behalf of the decedent’s successor in interest (as defined in Section 377.11 of the California Code of Civil Procedure) with respect to the decedent’s interest in the action or proceeding.’ 

(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.’ 

(7) ‘The affiant or declarant affirms or declares under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.’” 

A certified copy of the decedent’s death certificate must be attached to the declaration.  (Code Civ. Proc. §§ 377.32, subd, (c).)

ANALYSIS:

            Plaintiff moves to have Beatriz Ramirez appointed as Jose Ramirez Bautista’s successor in interest.

            This complaint was filed on March 22, 2022. The complaint is based on various allegations under the Song-Beverly Act. After Plaintiff purchased the Subject Vehicle from Defendants, the vehicle experienced various problems. However, Plaintiff Jose Ramirez Bautista passed away on February 22, 2022. Plaintiff’s spouse, Beatriz Ramirez, seeks to become successor-in-interest.

A party who moves to be appointed as successor in interest must comply with CCP § 377.32(a). Here, the declaration of Beatriz Ramirez is sufficient. It provides the following:

1.      Name of the decedent: Jose Ramirez Bautista

2.      The date and place of decedent’s death: February 22, 2022, in Los Angeles, California

3.      “No proceeding is now pending in California for administration of the decedent’s estate”: Paragraph 3 of the Declaration indicates that no proceedings are pending for administration of the 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: The Declaration of Beatriz Ramirez does not indicate that the estate was administered. 

5.      Either of the following, as appropriate, with facts in support thereof:

                                                              i.      ‘The affiant or declarant is the decedent’s successor in interest (as defined in Section 377.11 of the California Code of Civil Procedure) and succeeds to the decedent’s interest in the action or proceeding.’ 

                                                            ii.      ‘The affiant or declarant is authorized to act on behalf of the decedent’s successor in interest (as defined in Section 377.11 of the California Code of Civil Procedure) with respect to the decedent’s interest in the action or proceeding.’ 

b.      Paragraph 4 of the Declaration complies with subsection (a) – Beatriz Ramirez is the successor interest as defined under CCP § 377.11.

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”: Paragraph 5 of the Declaration that no other person has a superior right to continue the action.

7.      “The affiant or declarant affirms or declares under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct’”: the Declaration was made under penalty of perjury.

Lastly, under subsection (c), a certified copy of the death certificate must be attached. Ex. A provides Jose Ramirez Bautista’s death certificate.

Conclusion:

            For the foregoing reasons, the Court decides the pending motion as follows:

            Motion for Order Appointing Beatriz Ramirez as Successor-in-Interest of Plaintiff Jose Ramirez Bautista is GRANTED.

Moving party is to give notice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:             December 15, 2022                 _________________________________                                                                                                                  Upinder S. Kalra

                                                                                    Judge of the Superior Court