LAWYERS TITLE COMPANY VS. PAUL NARCISSE, ET AL.

June 23, 2026 Law and Motion Calendar PAGE 32 Judge: HONORABLE NANCY L. FINEMAN, Department 04 ________________________________________________________________________

2:00 PM LINE 12 24-CLJ-06163 LAWYERS TITLE COMPANY VS. PAUL NARCISSE, ET AL.

LAWYERS TITLE COMPANY JOSETTE D JOHNSON PAUL NARCISSE

LAWYERS TITLE COMPANY’S MOTION FOR ORDER DISCHARGING STAKEHOLDERFROM LIABILITY; AND AWARD OFATTORNEYS FEES AND COSTS

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff Lawyers Title Co.’s Unopposed Motion for Order Discharging Stakeholder from Liability and Award of Attorney’s Fees and Costs is GRANTED.

“[W]henever conflicting claims are or may be made upon a person for or relating to personal property ..., such person may bring an action against the conflicting claimants to compel them to interplead and litigate their several claims.” (Code of Civ. Proc., § 386, subd. (a).) “In an interpleader action, the court initially determines the right of the plaintiff to interplead the funds; if that right is sustained, an interlocutory decree is entered which requires the defendants to interplead and litigate their claims to the funds.” (Shopoff & Cavallo LLP v. Hyon (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 1489, 1513.)

Plaintiff Lawyers Title Co. (“LTC”) presents evidence showing it served as escrow holder for a transaction between Defendants Paul Narcisse and Rina Narcisse (collectively, “Buyers”) and Defendants David Stariha and Bernadette Romero (collectively, “Sellers”), where (1) Buyers cancelled the contract and attempted to retrieve the $17,500.00 held by LTC and (2) Sellers objected and refused to agree to the disbursement of the funds to Buyers. (Mar. 20, 2026 Declaration of Ron Dechaine, ¶¶ 2–6.) Escrow holders in such transactions have long been held to be neutral stakeholders with a right to interplead the buying and selling parties and be dismissed. (See Pacific Loan Mgmt. Corp. v. Superior Court (1987) 196 Cal.App.3d 1485, 1490.)

The subject funds have already been deposited with the Court (see Oct. 4, 2024 Order, p. 3), and there is no opposition to LTC’s request to be discharged or its request that the remaining parties be enjoined from instituting any other proceeding regarding the rights and obligations between themselves and between LTC (see Code Civ. Proc., § 386, subd. (f)).

LTC also requests for an award of attorney fees and costs to be paid out of the deposited funds. When ordering the discharge of the interpleading plaintiff, “the court may, in its discretion, award such party his costs and reasonable attorney fees from the amount in dispute which has been deposited with the court.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 386.6, subd. (a); see, e.g., Southern California Gas Co. v. Flannery (2016) 5 Cal.App.5th 476, 487.)

June 23, 2026 Law and Motion Calendar PAGE 33 Judge: HONORABLE NANCY L. FINEMAN, Department 04 ________________________________________________________________________ LTC supports its request for fees and costs with evidence showing it has incurred $7,437.50 in reasonable attorney fees for the services of its former counsel in this interpleader matter, $1,600.00 in attorney’s fees for the services of its present counsel, and $1,029.40 in costs, for a total of $10,066.90. (Mar. 20, 2026 Declaration of Josette D.

Johnson, ¶¶ 3–7, exh. B.) There is also no opposition to this request; while the Sellers’ respective answers to the Complaint object to the costs of serving process on Sellers, costs of service are recoverable costs of a prevailing party and the answers do not establish any basis to deny such costs. Based upon its experience as a lawyer and trial judge, the court finds the hourly rates and time expended reasonable. (Reynolds v. Ford Motor Company (2020) 47 Cal.App.5th 1105, 1113-1114.)

Accordingly, the motion is granted.

Additionally, the court sets a hearing to determine how to distribute the deposited funds for September 22, 2026 at 2:00 p.m. in Department 4. Pursuant to Civil Code section 2924j, subdivision (d), the clerk shall serve written notice of the hearing by first-class mail on all claimants identified in the trustee's declaration at the addresses specified therein. The court will consider all claims filed at least 15 days before this hearing.

If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the court. Thereafter, counsel for Plaintiff shall prepare, for the court’s signature, a written order consistent with this ruling, pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1312, and shall provide written notice of the ruling to all parties who have appeared in the action, as required by law and by the California Rules of Court.