•· Fl LED
FILED . '' I
SUPERIOR SUPERIOR CQURT
COURT
l OF GUAM OF GUAM
2 20250CT 'S PH 2025 OCT "'3 *3: u l~
PH3:!JI
3 CLERK UF CLERK OF COURT
COURT -
.
~
4 BY: BY:
5
6 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM 7
8 8 ROSARIO S.
s. BAUTISTA
BAUTISTA and
MANUEL C.
c. SHOLING,
SHOLING, CWIL CIVIL CASE
CASE NO.
NO. CV0471-07
CV0471-07
9 Plaintiffs,
IO 10 DECISION AND ORDER 11 11 vs.
12 12 FRANCISCO TORRES, Individually and as the Previous Special Administrator and Now 13 13 Executor of of the Estate of Jesus U. Tories, Torres, and
14 Peter F. Perez,
15 15 Defendants.
Defendants.
16 16
17 DANIEL U. TORRES and BARBARA M. DeMELLO, TRUSTEE 18 UNDER THE ESTABAN TORRES FAMILY 19 TRUST DATED MAY 12, 12, 1995,
1995,
20 20 Plaintiff Plaintiff Interveners,
Intervenors,
21 vs.
22 22 ROSARIO S.
s. BAUTISTA
BAUTISTA and
23 MANUEL C.
c. SHOLING,
SHOLING,
24 24 Defendants 25 and
26 26 GLORIA C.
c. SHOLING,
SHOLING,
Z7 27 Third Party Defendant.
28 28
Eautisla Bautista v. Tories v. Torres
Case No. CV0471 CV0471-07
Decision Decision and and Order
Order
Page Page I off
of?
1 INTRODUCTION 2 This matter came before the Honorable Vernon came before Vernon P.
P. Perez on June
June 6,
6, 2025,
2025, for
for hearing on
3 3 Successor Plaintiff Catherine Successor Plaintiff CatherineSholing's Sholing's("Successor
("SuccessorPlaintiff')
Plaintiff')Joinder
Joiner Motion.
Motion. Present
Present were
were
4 Attorney Watson Wayson Wong
Wong on behalf of
of Successor Plaintiff and Attorney Successor Plaintiff Attorney Mitchell Mitchell F.
F. Thompson on
5 behalf of ofDefendant
Defendant Peter
Peter F.
F. Perez
Perez ("Defendant Perez").
Perez"). Having
Having reviewed
reviewed the
the pleadings,
pleadings, the
the
6 arguments presented, presented, and
andthe
therecord,
record,the
theCourt
Courtnow
now issues
issuesthe
thefollowing
following Decision and Order.
7 BACKGROUND 8 This matter arose from matter arose from a retainer agreementsigned retainer agreement signedon on October
October 15,
15, 1987
1987 ("1987
("l987
9 agreement") Ms. Ana agreement") between Ms. Ana Sholing Sholing ("Ms.
("Ms. Sholing")
Sholing")and
and Attorney
Attorney Jesus U. Torres
Jesus U. Torres("Attorney ("Attorney
10 10 Torres"), in which Torres"), in Torres would Attorney Tories
which Attorney would provide providelegal
legalservices
servicesto
tofamily
familymembers
members in
in exchange
exchange
11 11 for ten for percent (10%)
ten percent (10%) of ofthe
the monthly
monthly rental
rental earnings from the Pacific Islands the Pacific Islands Club Club Property
Property in
in
12 of for a period of twenty-five (25)
Tumon (25) years.
years. Ms.
Ms.Sholing
Sholingwas
wasthe
the mother
mother of
of Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs Manuel
Manuel
13 13 C. Sholing and Rosario Rosario S.
S. Bautista
Bautista(collectively,
(collectively, "Plaintiffs")
"Plaintiffs") and
and Third-Party
Third-Party Defendant
Defendant Gloria
14 C. Sholing. Plaintiffs Plaintiffsallege
allegeimproprieties
improprietiesininthe
thehandling
handlingofoftheir
theirbusiness
business and
and financial affairs
15 15 by Attorney Tories Torres and,
and, following
followinghis
hisdeath,
death, by
byDefendant Perez. 1
Defendant Perez.1
16 This matter has hasan
anextensive
extensiveprocedural
proceduralhistory.
history. Most
Most relevant
relevant to this Decision Decision and
and Order
17 thefollowing:
is the following:
18 18 On June 4, 2021, June 4, 2021, a Suggestion Suggestion of
of Death
Death on the
the Record under GuamRules under Guam Rulesof
of Civil
19 19 Procedure ("GRCP") Rule Procedure ("GRCP") Rule 25(a)
25(a) was
was filed
filedby
byAttorney
AttorneyWong,
Wong,setting
settingforth
forth that
that Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs //
20 Intervention Intervention Defendants Rosario S. Battista Bautista and
and Manuel
Manuel C. Sholing
Sholing died
died during
during the pendency
pendency of
21 this action.
action.
22 22 On July 7, 2021, 2021, Jose
JoseS.S.Bautista
Bautista("Jose")
("Jose")and
andCatherine
Catherine("Catherine")
("Catherine") B.
B. Sholing
Sholing filed
filed a
23 Motion Motion toto Substitute Substitute Parties
Parties as
as prospective successors. The prospective successors. The Court Court granted
granted the
the Motion
Motion to
24 24 Substitute astotoCatherine Substitute as Catherinesubstituting substitutingfor
forManuel
Manuel C.
C. Sholing
Sholingin
in Count
Count Eight.
Eight. (Dec.
(Dec. &
& Order at
25 25 15, Jul.
Jul. 25, 25, 2022).
2022). The Court denied the Motion Motion to
to Substitute
Substitute for
for Jose
Jose substituting for Rosario S.
S.
26 26 Bautista Bautista in in Count
Count Eight and for both Catherine and Jose Josefor
for Counts
Counts Ten
Ten through
throughTwelve,
Twelve, finding
finding
27 27 11 Attorney Attorney Tories Torrespassed
passed away
away in
in August
August 2002,
2002, and
and Ana
AnaSholing
Sholingpassed
passed away
away in
in September
September 2005. Battista
Bautista v.
28 Tories, 17,r'll.
Torres, 2017 Guam Guam 17 7.
Bautista v.
v. Torres
Tories
Case No.
No. CV0471-07
CV047l-07
Decision Decision and and Order
Page Page 2 of
of7
l they lacked standingtoto assert lacked standing assertthe claims.Id.
theclaims. Id The
The Court
Court found
found that
that there
there was "nothing in
in the
the
2 record ...
...suggesting
suggestingthat
thathe
theproposed
proposedsuccessors
successors are
are suing in
in their
their capacity
capacity as
as trustees of the
3 3 respective trusts."
trusts." (Dec.
(Dec. &
& Order at
at 11,
ll, Jul.
Jul.25,
25, 2022).
2022). The
TheCourt
Courtdetermined
determinedthat
that because
because "the
4 beneficiary of beneficiary ofaatrust trust generally
generallyisisnot
notthe
the real
real party
partyinininterest
interestand
andmay
may not
not sue
sue in
in the
the name of the
5 trust," the prospective successors successorshad
hadno standing. Id.
nostanding. Id
6 On August 10, 2023, 2023, the
the Court
Court granted
granted in
in part
part Jose
Joseand
andCatherine's
Catherine'sMotion
Motion to Reconsider
7 as to to Jose Jose substituting
substitutingasasplaintiff plaintiff for
for Rosario
Rosario S.
S. Bautista
Bautistain
in Count
Count Eight.
Eight. (Dec.
(Dec. & Order at 8,
8s Aug. 10, 2023).
2023). The Court gave Jose the theopportunity
opportunity within
within forty-five
forty-fivedays
days ofofthe
theissuance
issuance of
of the
9 Decision Decision and and Order to petition
petition for
for the
the appointment
appointment of
ofCatherine
Catherine as administrator for his mother's
Io 10 ancillary ancillary estate estate on
on Guam
Guam and have her pursue the the Eighth
Eighth Count.
11 11 On September 19, 2023, September 19, 2023,the
theCourt
Court granted
grantedBautista's
Bautista'sApplication
Application for
for Ex Parte Relief,
112 giving giving him him an
an extension to file his petition petition for
for an
an ancillary
ancillary probate
probate by October 17, 2023.
2023. (Order,
13 13 Sept. 19, 2023).
Sept. 19, 14 14 On March 1, 1, 2024, Successor
SuccessorPlaintiff
Plaintiff filed
filed an Appearance
Appearance of
of Administratrix Catherine Catherine
15 15 B.
B. Sholing Sholing advising advising that
that "Catherine B. Sholing Sholing was duly appointed appointed the Guam
Guam administratrix
administratrix of
of
16 S. Bautista's]
[Jose S. Bautista's] estate topursue estate to pursuehis
hismother's
mother's claims
claims in
in the
theEighth
Eighth Count
Count of
of the
theThird
Third Amended
17 Complaint for for this
this case"
case" and
and that
that as
as "administrator,
"administrator, she
she enters
enters her
her appearance
appearance in this
this case
case to
18 IS pursue Rosario Rosario S.
S. Bautista's
Bautista's claims
claimsin
in the
theEighth
EighthCount
Countof
ofthe
theThird
Third Amended
AmendedComplaint."
Complaint." The
19 pleading attached attached aa copy
copy of
of the
the Letters
Letters of
of Administration
Administration tiled
filed on
onFebruary
February 24,
24, 2024
2024 in
in Probate
Probate
20 20 Case No.
No. PR0167-23.
21 On On February 10, 2025,
February 10, 2025, Successor SuccessorPlaintiff
Plaintifffiled
filed the
the instant
instantJoinder
Joiner Motion.
Motion. Successor
Successor
22 22 Plaintiffmoves Plaintiff the Court moves the Court to
to join
joinJose
Jose as aaplaintiff
plaintiff in
in this
this case for the Tenth
case for Tenth to
to Twelfth
Twelfth Counts of
of
23 23 the Third Amended the Third Complaint2 pursuant Amended Complaints to GRCP pursuant to Rule 19.
GRCP Rule 19. See generally, Joiner See generally, JoinderMot., Mot.,Feb.
Feb. 10,
10,
24 24 2025. Successor Plaintiff argues Successor Plaintiff argues that "Mr.
"Mr.Bautista,
Bautista,as
as the
the representative
representative of
ofthe
the RSB Trust, should
25 2 2 The Tenth Count The Count of
ofthe
the Third
Third Amended
Amended Complaint
Complaintalleges
allegesmisrepresentation
misrepresentationon
on the
the part
part of
of Defendant
Defendant Perez as
26 26 to attorney's fees fees the
the Sholing
Sholing siblings needed
needed to
to pay to the
pay to the Torres
Tories Estate.
Estate. (Third
(Third Am. Comp!.
Am. Con ,r,r
161-169, Jul. 10,
pl. W 161-169, 10,
27 .27 2009). The 2009). Eleventh Count The Eleventh Count alleges alleges alterative
alternative misrepresentation misrepresentation based
based on
on similar
similar facts.
facts. Id ,r,i Id.atat'gm 170-177.
170-177. The
Twelfth Count Count alleges
alleges deceptive
deceptive trade
trade practices
practices on part of on the part of Defendant Defendant Perez
Perez based
based on on the
the indications,
indications,
28 misrepresentations, and/or misrepresentations, anrYor concealments coneealments described
described in
in the
the Tenth
Tenth and
andEleventh
Eleventh Counts.
Counts. Id. ,r,i 178-185.
at W
Id at 178-185.
Battista Bautista v.
v. Torrey
Torres
Case No.
No. CV0471-07
Decision Decision and Order and Order
Page of77 Page 3 of 1 joined as be joined as plaintiff plaintiffininthis
thiscase,
case, totopursue
pursue Mrs.
Mrs.Bautista's
Bautista'stheft
theftclaims
claimsagainst
against defendant
defendant
2 Perez." Id. atat 2-3.
Perez." Id. 2-3. On OnMarch
March10,
10,2025,
2025, Defendant
Defendant Perez
Perez filed
filed his
his Opposition,
Opposition, arguing
arguing that
that Rule
3 19 has no application in this this case
case and
and that
that Successor
SuccessorPlaintiff
Plaintiff has
has failed
failed to
to timely
timely move to
4 substitute the proper proper parties for
for Counts Ten through
through Twelve
Twelve under Rule 25. See generally, generally, Opp'n,
5 5 Mar. 10, 2025.
Mar. 10, DefendantPerez 2025. Defendant Perez sets setsforth
forth that
that"it
"it isisPlaintiffs counsel who inexplicably delayed Plaintiffs counsel
6 the resolution of this matter matter by
by failing to
to correct
correct deficiencies
deficiencies identified by the Court over two 7 7 years." Id.atat8.8.On years." Id March31, OnMarch 31,2025,
2025,Successor
Successor Plaintiff
Plaintifffiled
filedher
her Reply,
Reply, arguing
arguing that
that the
the Court
8 required to join is required joinJose Jose in
in this
this case
case because "he
"he has shown that
that he
he claims
claims an
an interest
interest in
in this
this action
g 9 and is so situated that that its disposition in
in his
his absence
absence may, as
as a practical
practical matter
matter impair or impede
10 IO his ability his ability to to protect
protect that interest." (Reply at interest." (Reply at 2,
2, Mar.
Mar. 31,
31, 2025).
II On On June 6, 2025,
June 6, 2025, the
the Court
Court heard
heard arguments
argumentson
onthe
theJoinder
Joiner Motion
Motionand
and subsequently
subsequently
12 placed advisement. 3 placed the matter under advisement.3 13 DISCUSSION 14 The parties parties dispute
dispute whether
whetherRule
Rule 19
19or
or Rule
Rule 25
25 should
should apply
apply to
to Successor
SuccessorPlaintiffs
Plaintiffs
15 15 Joinder Motion.Rule Joiner Motion. andRule and
Rule1919 Rule2525
address
addressdistinct
distinctprocedural
proceduralissues
issues related
related to
to parties
parties in
in
16 litigation.44 Rule Rule 19
19 provides
provides in
inrelevant
relevant part
part that:
that:
17 17 a.
a. Persons
Personsto tobebe Joined
Joined ififFeasible.
Feasible. AAperson
person who
who isis subject
subject to service ofofprocess process
and whose jointer will not deprive the court of jurisdiction and whose joinder will not deprive the court of jurisdiction over the subjectover the subject 18 18 matter ofof the
the action shall
shall be
be joined
joined as a party
party in the
the action
action if
if
19 19 1.
1. ininthe
theperson's
person'sabsence
absencecomplete
completerelief
reliefcannot
cannotbe beaccorded
accorded among
among those
those
already parties,
parties, or
20 20 2. thetheperson
personclaims
claimsan aninterest
interest relating
relating to
to the
the subject
subject of
ofthe
the action
action and
and is
21 so situated that thatthethedisposition
disposition of the action action inin the person's
person's absence may
22 ZN i. 1. as a practical
practical matter
matterimpair
impairor orimpede
impedethe theperson's
person's ability
ability to
protect protect that interest or
23 23
24 3 On June June 6, 2025, the Court also also heard arguments on Defendant arguments on Defendant Perez's Perez's Motion
Motion for
for Summary
Summary Judgment.
Judgment. That
25 Motion Motionwill willbe
beaddressed
addressed by
by the
the Court
Court in
in aa separate
separate Decision and
and Order.
4 26 Although AlthoughDefendant DefendantPerez
Perez also
also argues
argues that Rule 17
17 does not apply, see Opp'n at see Opp'n at 4-5,
4-5, Successor Plaintiff appears Successor Plaintiff appears to be to basing her be basing herjoinder jointer motion primarily on motion primarily on Rule Rule 19.
19. See JoinderMot.
See Joiner ("basedon Mot.atat9 9("based onthe thefacts
facts and
and the
the provisions
provisions
27 ofGRCP ofGRCPRuleRule19(a)(2)(i), 19(a)(2)(i),Mr.Mr.Bautista Bautistashould
shouldbe joinedtotopursue bejoined pursuethe
the RSB
RSB Trust's
Trust'sclaims
claims against
against defendant Perez."), defendant Perez.");
Reply at Reply at 2 ("The ("The provisions
provisions of of Rule
Rule 1919 itself clearly
clearly shows thatthis shows that thisCourt
Courtshould
shouldjoin
joinMr.
Mr.Bautista.").
Battista."). Therefore,
Therefore,
28 the Court does find itit necessary does not find address Rule necessary to address Rule 17 17 further
further at this time.
Bautisia Bautista v. Torrey Torres
Case No. CV0471~07 Case No. CV0471-07 Decision andOrder and Order
Page 4 oof7 Page f ii. 11. leave any
any of
ofthe
the persons
persons already
already parties
parties subject
subject to aa substantial substantial
1 ofincurring
risk of incurring double, double, multiple,
multiple, ororotherwise
otherwise inconsistent
inconsistent
2 obligations obligations by
by reason
reason of
ofthe
the claimed interest.
---- - - - - - - - - ~ -
3 IfIfthe the person
person has
has not
not been so joined,
joined, the
the court
court shall
shall order
orderthat
that the
the person
person be
be made
made a
4 party. party. IfIfthe
the person
person should
should join
joinasas aa plaintiff
plaintiffbut
butrefuses
refusestotodo
doso,
so, the
the person
person may be
made a defendant,
defendant, or,
or, in
in aaproper
proper case,
case,ananinvoluntary
involuntaryplaintiff.
plaintiff.
5 (Guam R. Civ. P. 19(a)).
6 Rule 25 provides in relevant part:
part:
7 7 (a) Death.
8 (l) (I)IfIfaaparty
partydies
diesand
andthetheclaim
claimisisnot
notthereby
thereby extinguished,
extinguished, the
the court
court may
9 order substitution of of the proper parties. The motion for substitution substitution may be
10 made by any party or or by bythethesuccessors
successors oror representatives representatives ofofthe
the deceased
deceased
party party and,
and, together with
with the
the notice
notice of
ofhearing,
hearing, shall
shall be
be sewed
served onon the
the parties
11 as provided in RuleRule 55 and and upon persons not parties in the manner manner provided provided
12 12 in in Rule
Rule 4 for
for the
the service
service ofofaa summons.
summons. Unless the the motion motion for
for substitution
is made not later than 90 days after after death death isis suggested
suggested upon the record by 13 13 service service of a statement
statement of of the
the fact of the
the death
death as provided herein for the the 14 14 service service of thethe motion, motion, thethe action
action shall
shall be
bedismissed
dismissed as
as to
to the
the deceased
deceased
15 15 party. party, (2) In
In the
the event of the death
death of
of one
one or
or more
more of of the
the plaintiffs
plaintiffs or of one or
16 more ofofthe
the defendants in an action in which the right sought to be enforced 17 17 survives only to the survives only the surviving surviving plaintiffs
plaintiffs or
or only
only against
against the
the surviving
surviving
18 18 defendants, the action
action does
does not
not abate.
abate. The
The death shall be be suggested upon the record and action shall and the action shall proceed proceed inin favor
favor of oror against
against the surviving
19 parties.
20 (Guam R. Civ. P. 25(a)).
21 "[B]ecause the Guam
Guam Rules
Rules of
of Civil Procedure generally derived from, although not Procedure are generally
22 22 identical to, the Federal Federal Rules of Civil
CivilProcedure
Procedure ("FRCP"),
("FRCP"), federal
federaldecisions
decisions that
that construe
construe the
23 23 federal counterparts federal to the counterparts to the Guam GuamRules
Rulesof
of Civil
Civil Procedure are persuasive Procedure are persuasiveauthority."
authority." Gov 't't of
of
24 24 Guam vs.
vs. O'Keefe, 2018
0 'Keefe, 20 Guam44,rfl 99((citation I 8 Guam omitted). "Rule citation omitted). "Rule 19 19 provides for the
the mandatory
mandatory
25 jointer ofofparties joinder parties 'needed 'needed for
for aa just
just adjudication]
adjudication,'commonly
commonlyreferred
referred to
to as
as 'necessary'
'necessary' parties."
parties."
26 26 Blumberg Blumberg v.
v. Gates,
Gates, 204 F.R.D.
F.R.D. 453,454
453, 454(C.D.
(C.D. Cal.
Cal.2001).
2001). "Rule
"Rule 25(a)(l)
25(a)(l) isis designed
designed to prevent
27 27 a situation in in which
which aa case
case is dismissed because becauseaaparty
partynever
never learned
learned of
of the death
death of
of an
an opposing
opposing
28 ZN
Battista Bautista v. Torres Tories
Case No.
No. CV0471
CV0471-07
Decision Decision and and Order
Page Page 5Sof7
off
1 party.
party. Instead, party is given 90 days Instead, the party days from from the time when
when itit learns
learns from
from compliance with
with Rule
2 25(a)(l)
25(a)(l)ofofthe thedeath
death of an opposing
ofan opposing party to take appropriate action."
action." In
In re
re Brand, 545 B.R. 37,
3 43 (Banlcr.
(Bankr. C.D. Cal. 2016)
2016) (citing
(citing Unicorn
Unicorn Tales
Tales v.
v. Banerjee, 138 F.3d
F.3d 467,470
467, 470(2d
(2dCir.
Cir.1998)).
l998)).
4 In this In this case,
case, Catherine and Jose
Josefiled
filed aa Motion to Substitute Motion to Substitute Parties in July 2021, after the
5 June 4, 2021 June 4, 2021 filing filing of aa Suggestion of Death Suggestion of Death on the Record Record under
under GRCP
GRCP Rule
Rule 25(a).
25(a). Both
6 Catherine and Jose Josesought
soughttotosubstitute
substitutethe
theoriginal
originalPlaintiffs
Plaintiffs for
for all remaining
remaining claims
claims at
at that time
7 (Count Eight, Count Ten, Count Eleven, Eleven, and
and Count
Count Twelve
Twelve of the Third Amended Complaint).
8 See generally, Mot. Substitute, See generally, Substitute, Jul. 7, 2021.
Jul. 7, 2021. Although
Although they
they ultimately
ultimately substituted
substituted the original
9 plaintiffs plaintiffs in in Count
Count Eight
Eight of
ofthe
the Third
ThirdAmended
Amended Complaint,
Complaint, they
they were
were not
not substituted
substituted for the
the
10 original plaintiffs plaintiffsininCounts
CountsTen,
Ten, Eleven,
Eleven, and
and Twelve.
Twelve. This
Thiswas
wasbecause
because the
the Court
Court determined
determined
11 they lacked standing to to assert
assert the
theclaims
claimsas
asthere
therewas
was"nothing
"nothingininthe
therecord
record...
... suggesting
suggesting that
12 successorsare the proposed successors aresuing suinginintheir
theircapacity
capacityas
astrustees
trusteesofofthe
therespective
respectivetrusts."
trusts." (Dec.
(Dec. &
&
13 13 Order at 11, ll, Jul.
Jul. 25,
25, 2022).
2022). Successor
Successor Plaintiff
PlaintiffCatherine
Catherine now moves for
for Jose
Jose to be joined
joined as
as a
14 party under under Rule l9(a)(2)(i),
19(a)(2)(i),as
as aa "representative
"representative of
ofthe
the RSB
RSB Trust"
Trust" to
to pursue
pursue the trust's theft
15 15 claims against Defendant Perez.
I 16 In light In ofthe
light of the procedural
procedural history
history of
ofthis
this matter,
matter, the
the Couit
Court isis not
not convinced
convinced that
that Rule 19
19
17 17 applies applies at this time instead of Rule 25(a).
instead of 25(a). The TheCourt
Courtacknowledges
acknowledges that
that Catherine
Catherine was not
18 18 formally substituted as aa plaintiff substituted as plaintiff on on behalf
behalf of
ofRosario
Rosario Bautista
Bautista for
forJose
Jose as
as to the
the Eighth Count
19 until until she she became an
an ancillary
ancillary representative
representative of
of Rosario's
Rosario's Estate
Estate in early 2024. However, However, itit is
is not
20 clear to the Court why Jose Jose could not have timely timely moved
moved to
to be
be substituted
substituted in
in as
as a trustee
trustee for
for the
21 21 RSB Trust after after the
the Court
Court determined
determined he did not have have standing as a trust
standing as trust beneficiary, beneficiary, or
or why
22 22 Successor Plaintiff could not have Successor Plaintiff have moved moved for
for such
such either.
either. Successor Plaintiff is Successor Plaintiff is not arguing that 23 Counts Ten to Counts Ten to Twelve of of the
the Third
Third Amended
Amended Complaint
Complaint were
were extinguished by the original extinguished by
24 Z4 plaintiffs' deaths. 5 As plaintiffs' deaths.5 As Defendant Defendant Perez
Perez sets
sets forth, "the
"the original
original plaintiffs
plaintiffsasserted
asserted counts
counts ten
25
5 26 "To "To substitute substitute aa party
party after
after death
death under
under Rule
Rule 25(a)(1),
25(a)(l), three
three requirements
requirements must
must be satisfied:
satisfied: (I)
(1) the substitution
motion must must be timely,
timely, (2)
(2) the
the pleaded
pleaded claims
claims must
must not have
have been
been extinguished by death, death, and (3) thethe person being 27 substituted mustbe substituted must beaa'proper 'properparty."'
party." Ghazarian
Ghazarianv.v. Republic
Republic ofa/Turkey, 2021 2021 WL 5934476
5934476 *l *l (C.D.
(C.D. Cal.
Cal. Nov. 16,
16,
2021) (citation omitted).
omitted). IfIfthetherequirements requirementsare
aremet,
met,"[t]he
"[t]hesubstituted
substitutedparty
partysteps
steps into
into the
the same
same position as [the]
[the]
28 original party."
party." Hilao
Hilao v.
v. Estate of Marcos, 103 F.3d 762,766 Estate a/Marcos, 766 (9th (9th Cir. 1996).
Bautisia Bautista v. Torrey Torres
Case No. Case No. CV047!-07 CV047 l -07
Decision Decision and Order Order
Page 6 of7 Page 1 through twelve. The Theneed
needtotosubstitute
substituteparties
parties to
toassert
assert those
those same
same claims is due
due to
to the death
death of
of
2 the original original plaintiffs." (Opp'natat7).
plaintiffs." (Opp'n 7). Successor SuccessorPlaintiff
Plaintiffpreviously
previously moved
moved the
the Court
Court to be
be
3 allowed to substitute for the remainder of of the claims in the Third Amended Complaint pursuant 4 to Rule 25(a), see see Mot.
Mot. Substitute,
Substitute, Jul.
Jul. 7,
7, 2021,
2021,which
whichwas
wasultimately
ultimately denied
deniedby
bythe
theCourt.
Court. (Dec.
5 5 Order, Jul.
& Order, Jul. 25, 25, 2022). Further,
Further, Successor
Successor Plaintiff
Plaintiff has
has never
never moved
moved the
theCourt
Court for
for leave
leave for
6 time or additional time or late late filing.
filing. See,
See, e.g., Guam R. Civ. P.
e.g., Guam P. 6(b) ("[T]he court for ("[T]he court forcause
cause shown
shown may
7 7 any time at any in its time in itsdiscretion"
discretion"permit
permitaalate
latefiling.);
filing), see also Zanowick see also Zanowiek v.v.Baxter BaxterHealthcare
Healthcare Corp.,
Corp.,
8 850 F.3d F.3d 1090, 1090, 1094
1094(9th
(9thCir.
Cir. 2017). Accordingly, the 2017). Accordingly, the Court Court finds
finds that
that Rule
Rule 25(a)
25(a) applies
applies and
9 Successor Plaintiff has Successor Plaintiff has not not timely
timely moved for
for substitution.
substitution.
10 IO CONCLUSION
11 For For the
the foregoing
foregoing reasons, the Court reasons, the Court hereby hereby DENIES
DENIES Successor
SuccessorPlaintiffs
Plaintiffs Joinder
Joiner
12 Motion.
13 ~ 72f&
14 IT IS SO ORDERED this 1.7 day ofof October, 2025.
15
16 u
17 HONORABQE VERNQ P. PEREZ Judge, Supé1§f0r@oi11*t of Golan 18
/ .4 ,
19 . ;/yr
ff, '
20 20
21
22
23 23
24
25 25
26 26
27 27
28
Eautista Bautista v. Tories Torres
Case No.
No. CV0471-07
CV047l-07
Decision Decision and and Order
Order
Page Page 77of7
off