Judge: Holly J. Fujie, Case: 24STCV30681, Date: 2025-01-24 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV30681    Hearing Date: January 24, 2025    Dept: 56

 

 

 

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

 

 VOKSHORI LAW GROUP, APLC,

                        Plaintiff,

            vs.

 

 WINIFRED GREEN, and DOES 1 TO 10, inclusive,

                                                                             

                        Defendants.                              

 

      CASE NO.:  24STCV30681

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE:

MOTION TO TRANSFER

 

Date: January 24, 2025

Time: 8:30 a.m.

Dept. 56

 

 

 

MOVING PARTY:  Defendant Winifred Green (“Defendant”)

RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff Vokshori Law Group, APLC (“Plaintiff”)

 

            The Court has considered the moving, opposition and reply papers.

 

BACKGROUND

            This is a breach of contract action arising from an attorney-client relationship. On November 20, 2024, Plaintiff filed the operative complaint (“Complaint”) alleging a cause of action for breach of contract based on unpaid legal fees.

 

            On December 23, 2024, Defendant filed the instant motion to transfer (the “Motion”). On January 8, 2025, Plaintiff filed an opposition (the “Opposition”). On January 15, 2025, Defendant filed a reply (the “Reply”).     

 

DISCUSSION

            “The court may, on motion, change the place of trial in the following cases: (a) When the court designated in the complaint is not the proper court.” (Code Civil Procedure (“CCP”), § 397, subd. (a).) 

 

A court is proper if it is in the county in which the defendant resides, in which the plaintiff was injured, or in which the parties’ contract was executed. (CCP, §§ 395, subd. (a), 395, subd. (b).) If the plaintiff files an action with an improper court, that court must transfer the action to a proper court, either upon the defendant’s motion or on its own motion. (CCP, §§ 396a, subd. (b), 396b.) Where venue is improper, the defendant bears the burden of bringing this defect to the court’s attention. (Mission Imps., Inc. v. Superior Court (1982) 31 Cal.3d 921, 929.)

 

            Defendant argues that the proper venue lies in San Diego County because she resides in San Diego County, she executed the legal services agreement (the “Agreement”) in San Diego County, and the underlying litigation was filed in San Diego County. (Mot. pp. 6:27-7:9.)

 

            In the Opposition, Plaintiff asserts that venue is proper in Los Angeles County because Plaintiff performed the legal services from its principal place of business in Los Angeles and the Agreement requires only that fee disputes are to be tried before a California Superior Court judge but does not limit venue to San Diego County. (Opp. pp. 3:24-4:10.)

 

            The Court finds in favor of Defendant. Defendant resides in and executed the Agreement in San Diego County. (Green Decl. ¶¶ 9, 13; see also CCP § 395 subd. (a).) This action arises out of legal representation that occurred in San Diego Superior Court related to real property located in San Diego County. (Green Decl. ¶ 14; see also CCP § 395 subd. (a).) The Agreement between the parties is silent as to whether fee disputes are to be tried in Los Angeles or San Diego. (Compl. Ex. A.) Thus, Defendant has met her burden to show that venue is proper in San Diego County.  

 

Request for Sanctions

            “In its discretion, the court may order the payment to the prevailing party of reasonable expenses and attorneys' fees incurred in making or resisting the motion to transfer whether or not that party is otherwise entitled to recover his or her costs of action.” (CCP, § 396b subd. (b).) 

 

            Both parties argue that they are entitled to monetary sanctions pursuant to this statute. (Mot. pp. 7:17-8:3; Opp. pp. 4:19-5:5.) The Court exercises its statutory discretion to find that no sanctions should be awarded in favor of either party. Defendant’s motion for change of venue was in good faith, as was Plaintiff’s opposition. 

 

            The Motion to Transfer Venue is GRANTED. The requests for sanctions are DENIED.  

 

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 24th day of January 2025

 

 

 

 

Hon. Holly J. Fujie

Judge of the Superior Court