Estate of Anne Louise Blystone

property claimed to belong to decedent must be brought. This petition cannot be brought within a civil action; The implementing code section (section 850) appears in the Probate Code and contemplates the filing of a "petition," which is a term of art used in probate proceedings.

To be sure, the Probate Code contemplates overlap with civil actions. (See Prob. Code, Sec.Sec. 855 [authorizing the probate action brought under this part to include claims, causes of action, or matters that are normally raised in a civil action]; 856.5 [prohibiting the court from granting the petition if it determines that the matter should be determined by a civil action].) These code sections demonstrate the intent that a probate action is required to pursue the probate claims. The probate action can be subsequently related to the instant civil proceeding. Genis does not need permission to file that probate action.

As noted above, the court may order arbitration among the parties who have agreed to arbitration and stay the pending court action or special proceeding pending the outcome of the arbitration proceeding. (Code Civ. Proc., Sec. 1281.2.) That is precisely what the court intends to do here.

Summary of Rulings

The Motion to Set Aside and/or Vacate and/or Correct Erroneous Entry of Order Granting Stupin's 170.6 against Anderle is denied. The Motion to Set Aside "Void" Order of May 2, 2023 Purporting to Disqualify Anderle is denied. The Motion to Amend the Second Amended Complaint is denied. The Motion to Compel Arbitration is granted. Darryl Genis is ordered to arbitrate the causes of action in his Second Amended Complaint against Daniel Genis in accordance with the terms of the Confidential Settlement and Release.

Those causes of action are hereby stayed as against Daniel Genis pending further order of the court. The causes of action against the Stupin defendants are also stayed pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.2 pending further order of the court. The remaining motions are to be decided by the arbitrator. Defendants are directed to provide the court with a proposed order reflecting these rulings.

[1] Darryl Genis's argument that the Stupins have been dismissed out of this case as defendants is thus unsupported by the record. (See Stipulation and Order for Interlocutory Order of Discharge for Interpleader signed May 3, 2023 by Judge Colleen Sterne.)

The Stupins arguably remain as named defendants in the first cause of action (Declaratory and Injunctive Relief), the third cause of action (recission of Second Contract Within CSAR To Waive Petition to Probate of Estate of Arline Genis) and the ninth cause of action (Civil Conspiracy). The Order did not dismiss them from the first cause of action and they are named as defendants in the prayer of the third and ninth causes of action. Thus, the record is not clear that the Stupins have been dismissed from this action entirely.