Judge: Curtis A. Kin, Case: 24STCV25744, Date: 2025-03-04 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 24STCV25744 Hearing Date: March 4, 2025 Dept: 86
Plaintiff Pacific Reach Properties Development (US) LLC’s application for right to attach order with respect to defendant Alliance Mechanical Group, Inc. is GRANTED.
Pursuant to CCP §484.090, the Court finds:
1) the claim is one upon which attachment may be issued;
2) plaintiff has established the probable validity of the claim;
3) attachment is not sought for any purpose other than recovery on the claim; and
4) the amount to be attached is greater than zero.
Plaintiff Pacific Reach Properties Development (US) LLC is the owner of the multi-family property located at 810 South Spring Street in Los Angeles, commonly known as the National City Tower. (Ramsay Decl. ¶ 3.) On May 8, 2024, plaintiff, through Pacific Reach Properties Development LP, and defendant Alliance Mechanical Group Inc. (“AMG”) entered into a written Subcontract for the replacement of a cooling tower. (Ramsay Decl. ¶ 9 & Ex. A [plaintiff designed as client].) As part of the Subcontract, plaintiff paid a 65% deposit totaling $213,655. (Ramsey Decl. ¶¶ 10, 16 & Exs. B, C.)
Between May and August 2024, plaintiff’s representatives sought made at least 16 attempts to contact AMG’s owner, defendant Vrej Baghoomian, to ascertain the status of defendant’s performance under the Subcontract, e.g., confirmation of the purchase of the cooling tower, the permits required for installation, and proof of payment of the deposit. (Ramsay Decl. ¶ 11.) Baghoomian did not respond until August 7, 2024, indicating that he was waiting for delivery of the cooling tower. (Ramsay Decl. ¶ 12.)
On May 1, 2024, prior to execution of the Subcontract, Baghoomian informed one of plaintiff’s representatives that Air Treatment Corporation, the cooling tower supplier, indicated an 8 to 10-week lead time. (Ramsay Decl. ¶ 8.) On August 7, 2024, Air Treatment Corporation told plaintiff that AMG never ordered a replacement cooling tower. (Ramsay Decl. ¶ 12.)
Baghoomian failed to respond to subsequent inquiries from plaintiff. (Ramsay Decl. ¶ 12.) Plaintiff demanded return of its deposit from AMG and Baghoomian. (Ramsay Decl. ¶ 13.) The demand has gone unanswered, and the deposit remains unreimbursed. (Ramsay Decl. ¶¶ 13, 14.)
Based on the foregoing, Baghoomian appears to have repudiated the contract, thereby entitling plaintiff to pursue a breach of contract claim. (See Taylor v. Johnston (1975) 15 Cal.3d 130, 137.)
In opposition, AMG objects to the declaration of Joshua Ramsay, filed in support of the
application for right to attach order, based on lack of personal knowledge and foundation. The objections are OVERRULED. Ramsay averred that he is Director of Operations for plaintiff. (Ramsay Decl. ¶ 1.) Ramsay’s status as an officer and director “gave him sufficient personal knowledge to establish a foundation for his assertions” concerning the agreement and transaction at issue. (See Taylor v. Financial Casualty & Surety, Inc. (2021) 67 Cal.App.5th 966, 983.)
Based on the foregoing, the application will be granted in the amount of $213,655, the amount of the deposit.
With respect to the amount of undertaking, CCP § 489.220 provides for an undertaking in the amount of $10,000. AMG seeks an undertaking in the amount of $100,000. “If, upon objection to the undertaking, the court determines that the probable recovery for wrongful attachment exceeds the amount of the undertaking, it shall order the amount of the undertaking increased to the amount it determines to be the probable recovery for wrongful attachment if it is ultimately determined that the attachment was wrongful.” (CCP § 489.220(b).) Other than characterizing the requested attachment as “broad-ranging” in a conclusory fashion, AMG does not attempt to explain why a $100,000 bond is necessary to compensate it for any wrongful attachment. A writ will issue upon the posting of bond in the amount of $10,000. (CCP § 489.220.)
The Court will sign the proposed right to attach order submitted on 1/21/25.