Judge: Armen Tamzarian, Case: 22STCV30669, Date: 2023-01-11 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 22STCV30669 Hearing Date: January 11, 2023 Dept: 52
Defendant Paul
Payne III’s Demurrer to Complaint
Defendant Paul Payne III demurs to the
first, second, and fourth causes of action
in the complaint by plaintiffs Douglas Knight and Vicki Knight.
Summary
of Allegations
Plaintiffs allege they and defendant
Robert Rose all own shares in a corporation, Century Rooter and Jetting
Service, Inc. (Comp., ¶¶ 1-3.) Plaintiffs allege they each own 24.5% of the
corporation (¶¶ 1-2), while Rose was “the majority shareholder” (¶ 42).
Defendant
Paul Payne III is a certified public accountant. (Comp., ¶ 4.)
In a scheme to take plaintiffs’ shares in the corporation, Rose hired
Payne to falsify the corporation’s 2021 tax return. (¶¶ 14-17.)
Plaintiffs allege that, based on over a decade of Century Rooter and
Jetting Service, Inc.’s prior tax returns, Payne knew they each owned
24.5%. (¶ 15.) Payne, however, prepared a tax return stating
plaintiffs each owned only 8.75% of the corporation. (¶ 17.)
The complaint further alleges, “Payne knew that filing a return
inconsistent with earlier returns would cause significant injury to Plaintiffs
and result in an almost certain audit. Payne
knew that if he were to change the percentage ownership interests, he was
obligated to file amended returns for earlier years.” (¶ 18.)
Plaintiffs
also allege that Rose sent fake invoices to the corporation for $5,000 per
month to rent office space, but used the money to pay for his own
residence. (Comp., ¶ 20.) They allege, “Payne included the falsified
expenses on the tax return and failed to conduct proper due diligence on the
legitimacy of the expense.” (Ibid.)
1st
Cause of Action: Financial Elder Abuse
Plaintiffs fail to allege sufficient facts for this
cause of action. The Welfare and Institutions
Code “broadly defines financial abuse of an elder as occurring when a person or
entity ‘[t]akes, secretes, appropriates, obtains, or retains real or personal
property of an elder’ for ‘a wrongful use or with intent to defraud, or both,’
as well as ‘by undue influence....’ ” (Paslay
v. State Farm General Ins. Co. (2016) 248 Cal.App.4th 639, 656.)
Plaintiffs do not allege sufficient facts showing
Payne either took, appropriated, or retained any of their property. The only factual allegations against him are
that he filed a tax return: (1) misstating their interests in a corporation,
and (2) including the false expenses Rose charged the corporation.
“A tax return is merely a statement of the taxpayer’s
claim and does not establish the truth of the matters set forth therein.” (Gubbini v. C.I.R. (T.C. 1996) 71
T.C.M. (CCH) 2993.) The tax return was a
statement that plaintiffs owned less of the corporation than they really
do. Telling that to the IRS does not
make it so.
Plaintiffs also allege no damages resulting from Payne
including falsified expenses in the tax return.
The alleged facts do not support any inference that, because the tax
return included false expenses, plaintiffs lost any property. That doing so will “result in an almost
certain audit” (Comp., ¶ 18) is not enough.
That an audit will happen is speculative. Even if plaintiffs have been audited, that
only constitutes “potential liability” which “could not amount to actual harm
until the date of the deficiency tax assessment or finality of the audit
process.” (International Engine
Parts, Inc. v. Feddersen & Co. (1995) 9 Cal.4th 606, 620.)
2nd
Cause of Action: Conversion
Plaintiffs allege insufficient facts
for conversion. “The basic elements of the tort are (1) the plaintiff’s ownership or
right to possession of personal property; (2) the defendant’s disposition of
the property in a manner that is inconsistent with the plaintiff’s property
rights; and (3) resulting damages.” (Fremont
Indemnity Co. v. Fremont General Corp. (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 97,
119.)
Plaintiffs
allege only the first element. They had
a right to possess personal property, their 24.5% shares in the corporation. Plaintiffs do not, however, allege Payne
disposed of that property in any manner.
Payne made statements to the IRS about plaintiffs’ property. Those statements did not and could not have
the legal effect of diminishing plaintiffs’ interest in the corporation.
For the same reasons as the first cause of action,
plaintiffs also fail to allege resulting damages. They do not allege facts showing that, by
filing a tax return including false expenses and misstating plaintiffs’ shares
of the corporation, Payne caused any harm to them.
4th
Cause of Action: Aiding and Abetting Breach of Fiduciary
Duty
Plaintiffs fail to allege sufficient
facts for this cause of action. Aiding
and abetting breach of fiduciary duty requires: “ ‘(1) a third party’s breach
of fiduciary duties owed to plaintiff; (2) defendant’s actual knowledge of that
breach of fiduciary duties; (3) substantial assistance or encouragement by
defendant to the third party’s breach; and (4) defendant’s conduct was a
substantial factor in causing harm to plaintiff.’ ” (George v. eBay, Inc. (2021) 71
Cal.App.5th 620, 641.)
Even
assuming plaintiffs allege sufficient facts to state a cause of action against
defendant Robert Rose for breach of fiduciary duty, they do not allege
sufficient facts to state a cause of action against Payne for aiding and
abetting Rose. As discussed above,
allegations about what Payne stated in the corporation’s tax return fail to
show Payne did anything that caused harm to plaintiffs.
Plaintiffs
allege Rose did other things that, for the purposes of this demurrer, the court
assumes may have breached Rose’s fiduciary duty and caused harm to plaintiffs. For example, they allege Rose “made violent
physical threats to [plaintiffs] to attempt to intimidate
them into giving up their interest in” the corporation. (Comp., ¶ 19.)
But
plaintiffs rely solely on conclusory allegations that Payne knew of those
things and substantially assisted or encouraged them. They allege, “Rose and Payne schemed to
muscle Douglas Knight and Vicki Knight out of” Century Rooter and Jetting
Service, Inc. (Comp., ¶ 19.) The complaint further alleges, “Payne
colluded in or aided and abetted the breach of fiduciaries by Rose, and was an
active and knowing participant in Rose's breaches of fiduciary duties owed to
Plaintiffs. Payne directly and
indirectly benefitted from Rose's breaches of his fiduciary duties.” (¶ 55.)
These
allegations generically characterize unspecified conduct by Payne as scheming,
colluding, aiding, abetting, and being an active participant. Those are conclusions, not facts. They echo the legal and factual conclusions
required for aiding and abetting, but they have no supporting factual
allegations to stand on. The complaint
does not allege what Payne did to assist Rose, other than filing the tax
return—which did not cause any harm to plaintiffs.
Disposition
Defendant Paul Payne III’s demurrer
to the first, second, and fourth causes of action is sustained with 20
days’ leave to amend.