Judge: Christian R. Gullon, Case: 24PSCV00993, Date: 2024-05-21 Tentative Ruling

The Court may change tentative rulings at any time. Therefore, attorneys are advised to check this website to determine if any changes or updates have been made to the tentative ruling.

Counsel may submit on the tentative rulings by calling the clerk in Dept. O at 909-802-1126 before 8:30 the morning of the hearing. Submission on the tentative does not bind the court to adopt the tentative ruling at the hearing should the opposing party appear and convince the court of further modification during oral argument.

The Tentative Ruling is not an invitation, nor an opportunity, to file any further documents relative to the hearing in question. No such filing will be considered by the Court in the absence of permission first obtained following ex-parte application therefore.

Case Number: 24PSCV00993    Hearing Date: May 21, 2024    Dept: O

Tentative Ruling

RETAIL VENTURES ONE, LLC’S NOTICE OF MOTION TO REMOVE INVALID MECHANICS LIEN is GRANTED.

Background

This case arises from a contract for improvements to certain real property. Plaintiff DON SOINI, JR. dba DON'S RETAIL SERVICES alleges the following against Defendants RETAIL VENTURES ONE, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company; P&K BUILDERS, LLC, a Texas Limited Liability Company; KDM CALIFORNIA LLC: In May 2023, Plaintiff entered into a written subcontract with P&K, a general contractor, to perform certain construction work. The value of the labor, materials, equipment, and services supplied by Plaintiff is at least $82,636.60, but, despite demands, P&K has refused to pay Plaintiff per the contract and change order.

On March 28, 2024, Plaintiff filed suit asserting the following causes of action (COAs):

(1) BREACH OF WRITTEN CONTRACT;

(2) FORECLOSURE OF MECHANICS LIEN;

(3) COMMON COUNTS - GOODS AND SERVICES RENDERED;

(4) COMMON COUNTS -ACCOUNT STATED;

(5) COMMON COUNTS - AMOUNT AGREED, and (6) STATUTORY VIOLATIONS

On April 2, 2024, Retail filed the instant motion.

On April 3, 2024, the court (department G) denied Defendant's Ex-Parte Application for Order Advancing and Shortening Time to hear its Motion to Remove Invalid Mechanics Lien due to a lack of showing of irreparable harm.

On April 5, 2024, Plaintiff dismissed Retail.

On April 15, 2024, the court found cases 24PSCV00945 and 24PSCV00993 related, with 24PSCV00945 deemed as the lead case.

On April 26, 2024, the court held its Status Conference Re: Related Case. Counsel for Retail appeared. The court’s minute order provides that the mechanic’s lien motion was to remain as previously set.

On May 6, 2024, Plaintiff dismissed KDM.

Discussion

Retail brings forth the motion because Plaintiff Don Soini, Jr. is an unlicensed contractor. Effectively, as an unlicensed contractor, Plaintiff could not file a mechanic’s lien (Motion p. 4, citing Slatkin v. White (2002) 102 Cal.App.4th 963, 968) let alone foreclose on his or her mechanic’s lien (Motion p. 4, citing Lewis & Queen v. N.M. Ball Sons (1957) 48 Cal.2d 141, 154–155; Cash v. Blackett (1948) 87 Cal.App.2d 233, 237.) In fact, as an unlicensed contractor, Plaintiff may not bring or maintain any action for the collection of compensation for the performance of any act or contract. (See Contractors State License Law (CSLL) § 7000 et seq; MW Erectors, Inc. v. Niederhauser Ornamental & Metal Works Co., Inc. (2005) 36 Cal.4th 412.)

Here, not only does Plaintiff not allege that he is a licensed contractor (Bus. & Prof. Code § 7031(a)),[1] but Retail has found no record for Plaintiff on the Contractors State Licensing Board and found no record for Plaintiff. (Motion p. 5.)

Absent an opposition, Plaintiff has failed to meet his burden to establish the probable validity[2] of his mechanics lien because he has failed to demonstrate he was licensed by the Contractors State License Board at the time of the alleged work.

Therefore, as Plaintiff does not allege that it is licensed by the Contractors State License Board, the December 28, 2023 recorded mechanics lien is invalid.

Conclusion

Based on the foregoing, the motion is granted.[3]