Judge: Daniel S. Murphy, Case: 23STCV00726, Date: 2023-04-26 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV00726    Hearing Date: April 26, 2023    Dept: 32

 

KITE ISAAC FINDS THE FEATHER, et al.,

                        Plaintiffs,

            v.

 

WILLIAM UTNEHMER, et al.,

                        Defendants.

 

  Case No.:  23STCV00726

  Hearing Date:  April 26, 2023

 

     [TENTATIVE] order RE:

defendants’ motions to change venue

 

 

BACKGROUND

            On January 12, 2023, Plaintiffs Kite Isaac Finds the Feather and Jooblay, Inc. filed this legal malpractice action against various defendants. On March 20, 2023, Defendants William Utnehmer and Edward Sanchez filed identical motions to change venue to Mendocino County. Plaintiffs have not filed an opposition.

LEGAL STANDARD

“Subject to the power of the court to transfer actions and proceedings as provided in this title, the superior court in the county where the real property that is the subject of the action, or some part thereof, is situated, is the proper court for the trial of the following actions: (1) For the recovery of real property, or of an estate or interest therein, or for the determination in any form, of that right or interest, and for injuries to real property.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 392(a).) Upon motion, “the court shall, if it appears that the action or proceeding was not commenced in the proper court, order the action or proceeding transferred to the proper court.” (Id., § 396b(a).)

 

DISCUSSION

            The complaint concerns an interest in or injury to real property because it alleges that as a result of Defendants’ malpractice, Plaintiffs lost various parcels of real property. (See Compl. ¶ 17.) One of these properties is in Mendocino County, but none are in Los Angeles County. (Ibid.) Therefore, by operation of statute, Mendocino County is the proper venue for the action. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 392(a).) None of the parties or properties are located in Los Angeles. The complaint does not even contain any allegations mentioning Los Angeles. Plaintiffs do not oppose the motion and therefore concede that the action should be tried in Mendocino County.

CONCLUSION

            Defendants’ motions to transfer venue to Mendocino County are GRANTED. Plaintiffs shall bear the costs of the transfer. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 399(a).)