17-CIV-00131 MICHAEL MARQUEZ VS. AHMAD KHATIRINEJAD-FARD, ET AL.

MICHAEL MARQUEZ AHMAD KHATIRINEJAD-FARD
MICHAEL E. MARQUEZ ELIEZER COHEN

HEARING ON DEMURRER TENTATIVE RULING:

Defendant AHMAD KHATIRINEJADFARD’s Demurrer to First Amended Complaint is SUSTAINED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND, in its entirety.

This matter previously came on for hearing on February 22, 2018, April 23, 2018, May 25, 2018, August 3, 2018, and September 14, 2018. Given the circumstances of Defendant’s passing in mid-January, the Court ordered that pursuant to Probate Code § 8540(a), any interested party was directed to file a petition for the appointment of a special administrator for the Estate of Ahmad Khatirinejadfard and the Estate of Zahra Sabooni. As previously held by this Court, “A probate or trust estate is not a legal entity and has no capacity to sue, be sued, or defend an action. Any litigation must be maintained by or against the executor, administrator, or trustee of the estate. Galdjie v. Darwish (2003) 113 Cal.App.4th 1331, 1334; Greenspan v. LADT, LLC (2010) 191 Cal.App.4th 486, 496.” (See Minute Order on Demurrer to Complaint, dated August 22, 2017.)

It appears that Mr. Hamid Khatirine has been appointed Administrator of the Estate of Khatirinejadfard, but that Plaintiff has opposed the appointment Mr. Khatirine as Administrator of the Estate of Sabooni. (Decl. Cohen ¶ 3.) The Court notes that on September 25, 2018, Plaintiff filed a purported Proof of Service of Complaint and Amended Summons, but this Proof of Service erroneously indicates personal service on “Ahmad Khatirinejad-Fard, in his individual capacity, in his capacity as a surviving spouse and in his capacity as an Administrator for the Estate of Zahra Sabooni, Deceased.”

Given that many months and hearing dates have elapsed, and Plaintiff has yet to identify a proper Defendant in this action, and has failed to take any action to move this case forward (including the filing of a petition for the appointment of a special administrator for both Estates, as directed by the Court on multiple occasions), the demurrer to Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint is sustained without leave to amend.

If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the Court, pursuant to CRC Rule 3.1308(a)(1), adopted by Local Rule 3.10. If the tentative ruling is uncontested, DEMURRING PARTY is directed to prepare, circulate, and submit a written order reflecting this Court’s ruling verbatim for the Court’s signature, consistent with the requirements of CRC Rule 3.1312. The proposed order is to be submitted directly to Judge Susan L. Greenberg, Department 3.