Judge: Jon R. Takasugi, Case: 23STCV17642, Date: 2024-05-03 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV17642    Hearing Date: May 3, 2024    Dept: 17

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

 

DEPARTMENT 17

 

TENTATIVE RULING

 

JUAN M CUARENTA 

 

 

         vs.

 

CLAUDIA MIZUTANI et al.

 

 Case No.:  23STCV17642  

 

 

 

 Hearing Date:  May 3, 2024

 

Defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings is GRANTED.

 

            On 7/27/2023, Plaintiff Juan M. Cuarenta (Plaintiff), representing himself in propria persona filed suit against Claudia Mizutani (Defendant), alleging: (1) slander of title; (2) cancellation of instrument; (3) constructive trust; and (4) declaratory relief.

 

            Now, Defendant moves for a judgment on the pleadings.

 

            The motion is unopposed.

 

Discussion

 

            Defendant argues that Plaintiff’s motion is barred by res judicata/collateral estoppel.

 

The doctrine of res judicata precludes the re-litigation of certain matters which have been resolved in a prior proceeding under certain circumstances. (Brinton v. Bankers Pension Services, Inc. (1999) 76 Cal.App.4th 550, 556.) “Res judicata, or claim preclusion, prevents relitigation of the same cause of action in a second suit between the same parties or parties in privity with them.” (Mycogen Corp. v. Monsanto Co. (2002) 28 Cal.4th 888, 896.) “Collateral estoppel, or issue preclusion, precludes relitigation of issues argued and decided in prior proceedings.” (Ibid. 

 

“Issue preclusion prohibits the relitigation of issues argued and decided in a previous case, even if the second suit raises different causes of action.”  (DKN Holdings LLC v. Faerber (2015) 61 Cal.4th 813, 824.)  “Under issue preclusion, the prior judgment conclusively resolves an issue actually litigated and determined in the first action.”  (Id.)  “[I]ssue preclusion applies: (1) after final adjudication (2) of an identical issue (3) actually litigated and necessarily decided in the first suit and (4) asserted against one who was a party in the first suit or one in privity with that party.”  (Id. at 825.) 

 

            On 8/12/2020, Defendant here filed a separate action in Case No. 20STCV30584 against Plaintiff in this case, involving real property located at 6533 San Marcus Street Paramount, California 90723 (Subject Property). The causes of action asserted were for: (1) partition; (2) quiet title; (3) breach of fiduciary duty; (4) negligence; (5) cancellation of instrument; and (6) resulting trust.

 

After a bench trial, judgment was entered in favor of Defendant on all causes of action and Defendant and Plaintiff were each determined to be 50% owners of the Subject Property.

 

            Now, in pro per Plaintiff in this case, has filed a lawsuit alleging that he is the true owner of the property, and that Defendant improperly obtained title to the property with Plaintiff’s consent.

 

            After review, the Court agrees that Plaintiff’s claim is barred by collateral estoppel. First, the issue here is identical to that in the former proceeding, i.e., ownership of the Subject Property; (2) the issue was actually, and necessarily, litigated on the merits in the prior proceeding; and (2) that decision is final and on the merits. (DKN Holdings LLC, supra, 61 Cal.4th at p. 824.)

 

            Plaintiff’s non-opposition to the motion is considered a concession on the merits.

 

            Based on the foregoing, Defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings is granted.

 

 

It is so ordered.

 

Dated:  May    , 2024

                                                                                                                                                          

   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.  For more information, please contact the court clerk at (213) 633-0517.