Legal Question in Credit and Debt Law in California
Court Requires proof of �Successor in Interest� / Substitution of attorney?
I am domesticating a WA judgment to CA Superior Court. The original parties both Plaintiff and Defendant have passed away. I am assignee for the Plaintiff�s successor. The court awarded judgment to the Plaintiff against the Defendant (at the time the case was heard the �successor in interest� for the defendant was represented by counsel).
The defendant was a named corporation. The owner passed away and was succeeded by his nephew.
The CA court needs proof that the �Successor in Interest� (Nephew) is now the named defendant for the case to be entered in the defendants name (Nephew whom lives in LA)
I provided the CA court with a court cert. copy of the �Oath of Personal Representative� for the dead owner of the named corporation.
The CA court has rejected my application stating that the Defendant (Nephew) is not the successor in interest of the named Corporation. This may well be due to the fact the deceased is not directly named on the case file. The CA court stated that they need a �Substitution of Attorney�
Now this is a form that requires participation of the Nephew. This will never happen.
Q. What cert. copy of a document would convince the CA court that the �Successor in Interest� is the Nephew?
I can get case records that show that Nephew was served, represented for this case and order to pay.
1 Answer from Attorneys
Unfortunately your lack of understanding of what you are doing is preventing you from giving us a clear picture of the situation. Normally the nephew of a deceased owner of a corporation would have no liability at all of any kind. So I am at a loss to understand why and under what grounds you would be trying to get a CA court to domesticate a judgment against him. First off, the owner of a corporation is not liable for its debts unless you get a personal judgment against the owner too on some legal theory that pierces the corporate veil, or the corporation was dissolved and had assets that were not paid to satisfy the judgment and went to the owner instead. Second, even if you had that, only the decedent's estate, not the executor, administrator or representative, would be liable for the judgment. There may well possibly be grounds for holding the nephew responsible for the judgment, but none of them appear in your question, and therefore it is impossible for us to tell you what would convince a CA court to do what you ask. If you would like to discuss this with me so we can sort out the situation and see if anything can be done, please feel free to contact me by email or phone.
Related Questions & Answers
Looking for something else?
10,200 active attorneys ready to answer your legal questions today.
Featured Attorneys
Earn additional revenue and grow your business.
