Judge: Holly J. Fujie, Case: 22STCV00640, Date: 2024-07-12 Tentative Ruling

DEPARTMENT 56 JUDGE HOLLY J. FUJIE, LAW AND MOTION RULINGS. The court makes every effort to post tentative rulings by 5.00 pm of the court day before the hearing. The tentative ruling will not become the final ruling until the hearing [see CRC 3.1308(a)(2)], and are also available in the courtroom on the day of the hearing [see CRC 3.1308(b)]. If the parties wish to submit on the tentative ruling and avoid a court appearance, all counsel must agree and choose which counsel will give notice. That counsel must 1) call Dept 56 by 8:30 a.m. on the day of the hearing (213/633-0656) and state that all parties will submit on the tentative ruling, and 2) serve notice of the ruling on all parties. If any party declines to submit on the tentative ruling, then no telephone call is necessary and all parties should appear at the hearing in person or by Court Call. Court reporters are not provided, and parties who want a record of motions and other proceedings must hire a privately retained certified court reporter.

Case Number: 22STCV00640    Hearing Date: July 12, 2024    Dept: 56

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiffs The State of California and County of Los Angeles (“Plaintiffs”)

OPPOSING PARTY: None

On November 14, 2022, this Court entered an Order and Judgment (the “Judgment”) against Defendants Jay Prop Investments, LLC and Dank Depot, a Business Entity Unknown (“Defendants”), based upon its finding that Defendant Jay Prop Investments, LLC (“JP”) owned certain real property located at 455 E. Alondra Blvd., Gardena, California 90248-2901 (the “Property”), and that Defendant Dank Depot, which did not possess a state license to operate a cannabis dispensary, was operating an illegal cannabis dispensary on the Property.  The Court found that Defendants had defaulted on the Complaint filed in the instant action and that after entry of default, was found liable for the causes of action alleged therein. 

On May 28, 2024, Plaintiffs filed a Notice of Motion and Motion for Appointment of Receiver to Enforce Court Judgment (the “Motion”), concurrently with a Request for Judicial Notice, which is hereby granted, and the Declarations of Mark Adams and Jessica Cohen in support of the Motion.  No opposition was filed. 

Based upon the Motion and the supporting evidence, as well as on the Judgment, the Court finds that good cause exists for the issuance of the proposed Order re Motion for Appointment of Receiver to Enforce Court Judgment submitted by Plaintiffs.

The Motion is therefore GRANTED.

Moving party is ordered to give notice of this ruling.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SMC_DEPT56@lacourt.org as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  If the department does not receive an email and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion will be placed off calendar.

            Dated this 12th day of July 2024