Judge: Jon R. Takasugi, Case: 19STCV20062, Date: 2022-11-07 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 19STCV20062    Hearing Date: November 7, 2022    Dept: 17

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

DEPARTMENT 17

TENTATIVE RULING

Plaintiff’s motion for an order of assignment and restraining order is DENIED, WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

On June 7, 2019, Plaintiff Jacob Reich filed a Complaint against Defendant Mansour Hashem. On September 1, 2020, Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint (SAC) alleging: (1) breach of written contract; (2) money had and received; (3) common counts; (4) open book account; (5) account stated; (6) failure to honor checks; (7) fraud; (8) negligence; (9) unjust enrichment; (10) judiciary foreclosure; and (11) reformation of contract.

            Now, Plaintiff seeks an order of assignment and restraining order.  

            The motion is unopposed.

Discussion

            Plaintiff seeks assignment of all future rent payments from the real properties owned by the Defendant and Judgment Debtor to the Judgment Creditor. Moreover, Plaintiff seeks a Restraining Order pursuant to which the Judgment Debtor shall be restrained from collecting any rent from his Real Property which be subject to the Assignment Order until the Judgment which is the base of this Motion is satisfied.

Plaintiff’s motion sets forth a number of properties which he is “informed and believes” are owned, in some part, by Defendant. However, noticeably absent from Plaintiff’s motion is any evidentiary support to corroborate those claims. Plaintiff did not cite any legal authority indicating that the Court may assign rent payments for properties which have only been connected to Defendant based on “information and belief.” To obtain the requested relief, Plaintiff, at minimum, must submit evidentiary support to establish that Defendant holds an ownership interest in the subject properties which is subject to CCP section 708.510. Moreover, Plaintiff’s memorandum of points and authorities must contain substantive discussion showing that the requested orders are proper beyond a single citation to CCP section 708.510. (See CRC rule 3.113) (“The memorandum must contain a statement of facts, a concise statement of the law, evidence and arguments relied on, and a discussion of the statutes, cases, and textbooks cited in support of the position advanced.”)

            Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff’s motion is denied, without prejudice. 

It is so ordered.

Dated:  November    , 2022

   Hon. Jon R. Takasugi
   Judge of the Superior Court

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court at smcdept17@lacourt.org by 4 p.m. the day prior as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  If a party submits on the tentative, the party’s email must include the case number and must identify the party submitting on the tentative.  If all parties to a motion submit, the court will adopt this tentative as the final order.  If the department does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be placed off calendar. 

            Due to Covid-19, the court is strongly discouraging in-person appearances.  Parties, counsel, and court reporters present are subject to temperature checks and health inquiries, and will be denied entry if admission could create a public health risk.  The court encourages the parties wishing to argue to appear via L.A. Court Connect.  For more information, please contact the court clerk at (213) 633-0517.  Your understanding during these difficult times is appreciated.

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

DEPARTMENT 17

TENTATIVE RULING

Plaintiff’s motion for an award of after-judgment costs incurred in enforcing the award of attorney fees following this Court’s anti-SLAPP ruling is GRANTED.

On June 7, 2019, Plaintiff Jacob Reich filed a Complaint against Defendant Mansour Hashem. On September 1, 2020, Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint (SAC) alleging: (1) breach of written contract; (2) money had and received; (3) common counts; (4) open book account; (5) account stated; (6) failure to honor checks; (7) fraud; (8) negligence; (9) unjust enrichment; (10) judiciary foreclosure; and (11) reformation of contract.

On September 9, 2019, Defendant filed a XC against Plaintiff, setting forth claims for (1) fraud, (2) breach of fiduciary duty, and (3) declaratory relief. 

            Now, Plaintiff moves for an award of after-judgment costs.

Discussion 

            Plaintiff moves to recover costs after judgment limited to costs incurred in enforcing the judgment in the principal sum of $15,000.00 which was entered on or about June 3, 2021, following an order granting Plaintiff Attorney fees for the frivolous filing of Anti-Slapp Motion.

            The motion is unopposed. Thus, Defendant is considered to have conceded to the merits of the motion.

            Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff’s motion for an award of after-judgment costs is granted.

It is so ordered.

Dated:  November    , 2022

   Hon. Jon R. Takasugi
   Judge of the Superior Court

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court at smcdept17@lacourt.org by 4 p.m. the day prior as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  If a party submits on the tentative, the party’s email must include the case number and must identify the party submitting on the tentative.  If all parties to a motion submit, the court will adopt this tentative as the final order.  If the department does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be placed off calendar. 

            Due to Covid-19, the court is strongly discouraging in-person appearances.  Parties, counsel, and court reporters present are subject to temperature checks and health inquiries, and will be denied entry if admission could create a public health risk.  The court encourages the parties wishing to argue to appear via L.A. Court Connect.  For more information, please contact the court clerk at (213) 633-0517.  Your understanding during these difficult times is appreciated.