Gayle C. Aruta and John C. de Sulima Przyborowski v. Inna Vladimirovna Cook

Case Number

24CV04385

Case Type

Hearing Date / Time

Wed, 12/04/2024 - 10:00

Nature of Proceedings

Demurrer of Defendant to Complaint

Tentative Ruling

For Plaintiffs Gayle C. Aruta and John C. de Sulima Przyborowski: James F. Scafide, Tyler J. Sprague, Figueroa Law Group, LLP

For Defendant Inna Vladimirovna Cook: Miguel A. Avila, Sanger Law Firm, P.C.

RULING

For the reasons set forth herein, the demurrer of Defendant Inna Vladimirovna Cook to Plaintiffs’ complaint is sustained as to the complaint as a whole and to each cause of action therein, with leave to amend. Plaintiffs shall file and serve their first amended complaint on or before December 19, 2024.

Background

As alleged in Plaintiffs’ complaint:

Trella H. McCartor, a senior or dependent adult, lives alone in Santa Barbara. (Complaint, ¶¶ 1, 18.) Plaintiffs Gayle C. Aruta, who lives in San Diego, and John C. de Sulima Przyborowski, who lives in Los Angeles, are McCartor’s sister and brother, respectively. (Complaint, ¶ 18.)

Defendant Inna Vladimirovna Cook is a neighbor of McCartor. (Complaint, ¶ 10.)

Starting in 2020 but no later than April 2022, Cook began, and became entrenched in, a relationship of trust and confidence with McCartor. (Complaint, ¶ 10.) Plaintiffs have repeatedly attempted to contact McCartor since that time with little or no success and have been refused visitation by Cook. (Complaint, ¶¶ 3, 11.)

On May 2, 2023, McCartor created The Trella Helene McCartor Living Trust, dated May 2, 2023, into which McCartor placed real property located at 634 Calle de Amigos, Santa Barbara, valued at over $1 million (the Real Property). (Complaint, ¶¶ 4, 12.)

In November 2021, McCartor acquired a new Toyota, which was then transferred to Cook. (Complaint, ¶ 13.) In July 2023, McCartor acquired a new Prius vehicle, which was then transferred to Cook. (Ibid.)

On April 11, 2024, a deed was recorded transferring the Real Property to Cook. (Complaint, ¶ 14.)

On August 6, 2024, Plaintiffs filed their complaint in this action asserting six causes of action: (1) financial elder abuse; (2) unfair or deceptive practices against senior citizens and disabled persons; (3) nullification of trust; (4) unjust enrichment; (5) conversion; and (6) theft through false pretense (Pen. Code, § 496).

On October 1, 2024, Cook filed this demurrer to the complaint as a whole, and as to the first, third, fourth, fifth, and sixth causes of action.

No opposition or other response has been filed by Plaintiffs.

Analysis

“ ‘The rules by which the sufficiency of a complaint is tested against a general demurrer are well settled. We not only treat the demurrer as admitting all material facts properly pleaded, but also ‘give the complaint a reasonable interpretation, reading it as a whole and its parts in their context.’ ” (Zhang v. Superior Court (2013) 57 Cal.4th 364, 370, internal quotation marks and citations omitted.)

Cook demurs to the entirety of the complaint on the ground that Plaintiffs do not have standing to assert these claims.

“ ‘Every action must be prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest, except as otherwise provided by statute.’ [Citation.] ‘A “real party in interest” is generally defined as “the person possessing the right sued upon by reason of the substantive law.” ’ [Citation.] In other words, it is the person ‘ “who has title to the cause of action, i.e., the one who has the right to maintain the cause of action.” ’ [Citation.]” (Wanke, Industrial, Commercial, Residential, Inc. v. AV Builder Corp. (2020) 45 Cal.App.5th 466, 474.) “Standing is the threshold element required to state a cause of action and, thus, lack of standing may be raised by demurrer.” (Martin v. Bridgeport Community Assn., Inc. (2009) 173 Cal.App.4th 1024, 1031.)

Plaintiffs do not allege that they themselves are owners of, or have any property right in, the Real Property or any other property at issue in this action. Plaintiffs instead allege that all such property is, or was, owned by McCartor. Although Plaintiffs allege that they are the sister and brother of McCartor, without something more, familial relationship does not give Plaintiffs the right to sue on their own behalf for damages alleged against McCartor.

Plaintiffs also do not allege that they are asserting these claims on behalf of McCartor, as, for example, a guardian or conservator.

Plaintiffs have not alleged facts sufficient to show their standing to assert the claims of the complaint. The demurrer will therefore be sustained. This is a demurrer to Plaintiffs’ original complaint. Plaintiffs will be given leave to amend.

In view of this determination of lack of allegations to support standing, it is unnecessary for the court to address the remaining grounds asserted on demurrer.