Los Angeles Daily Journal

Friday, August 3, 2007 Jury Awards $2 to Spencer Tracy’s Grandson

By Rebecca Beyer Daily Journal Staff Writer

The grandson of Oscar-winning actor Spencer Tracy was awarded just $2 in compensatory damages by a Los Angeles County Superior Court jury after claiming that his aunt had defrauded his father of nearly $1 million. In dispute was $400,000 either loaned or gifted to defendant “Susie” Louise Treadwell Tracy by plaintiff Joseph Spencer Tracy’s father, John Tracy. Attorneys for Joseph and Susie each declared victory but for different reasons. “This is a case of greed,” said Mark A. Barondess, co-founder of Miller Barondess, who represented Susie Tracy. But Joseph Tracy’s attorney, Steven W. Kerekes, disagreed. “If you’re a fiduciary and in a confidential relationship and you profit at the expense of the principal, that transaction can be set aside,” he said. “We don’t really know what this transfer was [whether a loan or a gift], and we don’t really care. We do care that it allowed Susie to profit and it should be set aside.” Spencer Tracy, who won two Oscars for his roles in the 1938 film “Boys Town” and the 1937 film “Captains Courageous,” had two children with his wife, Louise Treadwell Tracy: John Tracy and Louise Treadwell Tracy, known as Susie. John Tracy was born deaf and suffered from Usher Syndrome, which worsened his eyesight over time. He lived with his parents until their deaths, and then in a care facility. According to Joseph, who sued his father’s sister in April 2006, Susie acted in John’s confidence, accepting $400,000 from him for her own gain in breach of her fiduciary duty to her disabled brother. With interest, Kerekes argued damages to his client’s father’s estate approach $1 million. Joseph Spencer Tracy v. Louise Treadwell Tracy, BC350333 (L.A. Super. Ct., filed April 7, 2006). But Barondess argued that John gave his client money over the years as gifts and that Susie never acted as her brother’s keeper. John Tracy died June 15 at his son’s ranch in Acton. He was 82. On July 20, after a three-day trial and one day of deliberations, a jury found that Susie and John did have a confidential relationship in which Susie acted on her brother’s behalf and that Susie “obtain[ed] a substantial advantage at the expense of John Tracy.” The award: $1 each in compensatory damages for two transactions of $320,000 and $80,000 that occurred in 1988 between John and Susie and John

20240.1 and Susan Moon (Susie’s domestic partner or long-time family friend, according to the plaintiffs and defense trial briefs, respectively). “We consider [the verdict] a win,” said Louis “Skip” Miller, co-founding partner of Miller Barondess. “It’s always unfortunate to have intra-family disputes like this. Susie Tracy loved her brother very much. To be sued by his children is very upsetting to her.” Barondess, who worked on the case along with Brian A. Procel and Ryan P. Connolly, said that in one of John Tracy’s last depositions he said it was “ridiculous” to think his sister had stolen from him. Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Andria K. Richey ruled neither side could use any deposition testimony from John Tracy. Barondess argued that the statute of limitations had passed on Joseph’s claims. But the jury ruled that the plaintiff did not learn of the transactions until April 2002, within the four-year statute of limitations. Still, Barondess and Miller both feel that the amount of the verdict is a victory for their client.

“By following their gut instinct, they awarded $2 in total - that makes a pretty strong statement,” Barondess said. But Kerekes said the jury verdict is a victory for his client. “They lost on every issue,” he said of Susie and her attorneys. On Wednesday, Richey heard oral arguments on Joseph Tracy’s motion seeking items from his grandmother’s estate, of which Susie is trustee. Those items include a family Bible, Spencer Tracy’s Oscar for “Captains Courageous,” the actor’s diaries, drawings of Lionel Barrymore and Ethel Barrymore and a photo of Spencer Tracy and Robert Stack. “Susie has not disputed that less than half of the estate remains,” Kerekes said. “My client is entitled to the remaining items.” Procel, who appeared for defendant Susie at the hearing, argued that the statute of limitations for such a claim had run out.

20240.1