Judge: Jon R. Takasugi, Case: 21STCV47140, Date: 2022-12-06 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV47140    Hearing Date: December 6, 2022    Dept: 17

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

DEPARTMENT 17

TENTATIVE RULING

Defendant’s motion to quash is DENIED. The business subpoena is modified to require documents only since 2021 relating to the subject property without any private bank account information.

On 12/28/2021, Plaintiffs Zohar and Leeron Regev (collectively, Plaintiffs) filed suit against Matthew Wilkie, Cal Developers, Inc., Angel Wayhang Kou, and Umro Realty Corp. On 7/26/2022, Plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint (FAC) alleging: (1) intentional misrepresentation; (2) negligent misrepresentation; (3) breach of fiduciary duty; (4) breach of contract; (5) declaratory relief. 

            On 10/10/2022, Plaintiffs dismissed Angel Wayhang Kou and Umro Realty Group from the action.

            Now, Defendant Cal Developers (Defendant) moves to quash or modify Plaintiff’s business subpoena for business records.

Discussion

            Defendant argues that following categories should either be quashed or modified from the business subpoena served by Plaintiff on third-party Escrow of the West:

-         REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS NO. 1:

Any and all DOCUMENTS RELATING TO the sale of the SUBJECT PROPERTY between Stanley Holding LLC and Cal Developers, Inc., including, but not limited to: Surveys, Escrow Instructions, Estimated Closing Statements, Final Closing Statement, Lender’s Instructions, Preliminary Report, Title Report, Wire Confirmation, Wire Funds Receipt, Deposits, Wiring Instructions, Checks (front and back sides)- received and issued, Purchase Agreements, Escrow Instructions, Cancellation Agreements, and Grant Deeds from January 01, 2021 to the date of production.

-         REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS NO. 3:

Any and all DOCUMENTS, by way of example only, and without limitation, all statements, checks (front and back sides)- received and issued, wire transfer confirmations, receipts, deposit slips, lines of credit, loans, mortgage applications, e-mails, and facsimiles RELATING TO any transfer of funds from YOU to CAL DEVELOPERS.

-         REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS NO. 4:

Any and all DOCUMENTS, by way of example only, and without limitation, all statements, checks (front and back sides)- received and issued, wire transfer confirmations, receipts, deposit slips, lines of credit, loans, mortgage applications, e-mails, and facsimiles RELATING TO any transfer of funds from CAL DEVELOPERS to YOU.

-         REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS NO. 6:

Any and all DOCUMENTS, by way of example only, and without limitation, all statements, checks (front and back sides)- received and issued, wire transfer confirmations, receipts, deposit slips, lines of credit, loans, mortgage applications, e-mails, and facsimiles RELATING TO any transfer of funds from YOU to MATTHEW.

-         REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS NO. 7:

Any and all DOCUMENTS, by way of example only, and without limitation, all statements, checks (front and back sides)- received and issued, wire transfer confirmations, receipts, deposit slips, lines of credit, loans, mortgage applications, e-mails, and facsimiles RELATING TO any transfer of funds from MATTHEW to YOU.

            As noted by Defendant, this case concerns a promissory note of $67,500. Plaintiffs allege that this sum was transferred as part of partnership deal with Defendants to own the Subject Property. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants defrauded them and, after the funds loaned by Zohar Regev were deposited into escrow, Wilkie cancelled the escrow and had these funds, in the amount of $67,500, revert to him and Cal Developers.

            As such, the Court finds the documents in each of the category above to be relevant to this action.

However, the Court agrees that the subpoenas should be limited to the relevant transaction (i.e., the purchase of the Subject Property) and the specific time period involved in this lawsuit (i..e, 1/1/2021-date of production). This conclusion is reinforced by the fact that in opposition, Plaintiffs argue that the subpoenas already contain such temporal limitations.    

            Finally, the Court finds sufficient cause to compel production of the specific bank account information requested. Here, there is no dispute that Defendants received the funds from escrow. However, the alleged wire transfer of funds between Defendants and Escrow of the West is central to Plaintiff’s claim. As such, Plaintiff is entitled to discover admissible evidence of this transfer. Moreover, as noted by Plaintiff in opposition, the documents are necessary to “help prove the alter-ego allegations, trace the funds deposited, discover the true cause as to why escrow was canceled, and more to prove the allegations made in the SAC.” (Opp., 9: 14-16.)

            Based on the foregoing, Defendant’s motion to quash is denied. The business subpoena is modified to require documents only since 2021 relating to the subject property without any private bank account information.

It is so ordered.

Dated:  December    , 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.