Judge: James A. Mangione, Case: 37-2019-00034135-CU-CO-CTL, Date: 2023-09-29 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - September 01, 2023

09/01/2023  09:00:00 AM  C-75 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:James A Mangione

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited  Contract - Other Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil) 37-2019-00034135-CU-CO-CTL PATEL VS CHHATRALA INVESTMENTS LLC [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED:

Defendant Chhatrala Investments, LLC's Motion for Summary Judgment, or Alternatively, Summary Adjudication is denied.

A defendant moving for summary judgment has met his or her burden of showing a cause of action has no merit if the defendant can show one or more elements of the plaintiff's cause of action cannot be established. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c(o)(2).) The defendant bears an initial burden of production to make a prima facie showing of the nonexistence of any triable issue of material fact. (Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 850.) If the defendant carries the burden of production, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to make his or her own prima facie showing of the existence of a triable issue of fact.

(Id.) 'There is a triable issue of material fact if, and only if, the evidence would allow a reasonable trier of fact to find the underlying fact in favor of the party opposing the motion in accordance with the applicable standard of proof.' (Id.) The Court finds that there are significant factual disputes in this case. Defendant is a limited liability company with three members: Salish Patel ('Salish'), Ashvin Patel ('Ashvin') and Hemant Chhatrala ('Chhatrala'). The parties dispute whether Janesh Patel ('Patel'), who signed the Note at issue in this case, is or was employed by Defendant and able to act on its behalf. As to the issue of agency, the Court finds that material factual disputes exist as to Patel's authority to act as Defendant's actual agent based on his past history of representing Defendant in real estate investment transactions and his signature on the settlement agreement regarding the underlying investment property and his communications regarding the Note. Furthermore, there are factual disputes as to Patel's ostensible agency and ratification in light of Patel's communications regarding the investment venture with Plaintiff, Salish Patel and Hemant Chhatrala, the existence of Patel's office space in Defendant's offices and company email address, and Salish and Chhatrala's acknowledgment of Plaintiff's investment. Finally, there are factual disputes related to the statute of limitations based on issues of equitable tolling/equitable estoppel given Plaintiff's communications with Chhatrala and Salish regarding the underlying settlement and acknowledgment of Plaintiff's debt.

All requests for judicial notice are granted. Defendant's evidentiary objection to paragraph 12 of Satish Patel's declaration is sustained as to the bracketed text only. All other evidentiary objections to this declaration are overruled. Defendant's evidentiary objections to the declaration of Dharmesh Patel are sustained as to objection numbers 21-23 and 28. Objection number 27 is sustained as to the parenthetical text only. All other evidentiary objections to this declaration are overruled.

The minute order is the order of the Court.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3011812  18 CASE NUMBER: CASE TITLE:  PATEL VS CHHATRALA INVESTMENTS LLC [IMAGED]  37-2019-00034135-CU-CO-CTL Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3011812  18