Judge: Kevin C. Brazile, Case: 24STCP02573, Date: 2025-01-14 Tentative Ruling

Hearing Date: January 14, 2025

Case Name: Jamgotchian, et al. v. Coastal Laundromat, Inc., et al. 

Case No.: 23STCV31285

Matter: Motion for Attorneys’ Fees 

Moving Party: Defendants Coastal, Bruce Nye, and Sonja Nye

Responding Party: Unopposed

Notice: OK

Ruling: The Motion is granted.

Coastal to give notice.

The Court encourages all parties to appear remotely via LA CourtConnect.  If submitting on the Court's tentative ruling, please follow the instructions provided above.

In case no. BC674357, on February 7, 2023, a jury entered verdicts in favor of Plaintiffs DONE! Ventures, LLC (“Done!”) and Coastal Laundromat, Inc. (“Coastal”), and against Defendants Jerry Jamgotchian, El Segundo Plaza Associates L.P. (“ESPA”), and Theta Holding IV, Inc. (“Theta”) for Plaintiffs’ claims for interference with contract, negligent interference with prospective economic advantage, and breach of contract.

On May 8, 2023, the Court entered a “judgment” on the verdict.  

On July 12, 2023, the Court ruled on a motion for new trial/JNOV, stating that the amount of punitive damages awarded by the jury was improper and that Coastal was either to stipulate to $525,000 or else the Court would grant a new trial only as to the amount of punitive damages.  Coastal stipulated to taking less punitive damages.

On September 5, 2023, the Court ruled on Coastal’s motion for attorneys’ fees and prejudgment interest.  Prejudgment interest was rejected, but the Court awarded $357,673 in fees.

On February 6, 2024, the Court entered a final ruling denying Defendants’ motion to tax costs with respect to Done!.  That ruling also rejected prejudgment interest for Done!.  

On February 27, 2024, the Court entered an “amended judgment”, which reduced the amount of punitive damages to be obtained by Done! and indicated the amount of fees, costs, and prejudgment interest to be awarded as discussed above.  

On March 27, 2024, the Court denied Defendants’ request to amend the February 27, 2024, judgment as follows: “(1) amend title of the Court’s February 27, 2024, judgment to read ‘Final Judgment’ and not its current incorrect and misleading title, ‘Amended Judgment,’ (2) Amend the date of the Court’s award of post-judgment interest from May 8, 2023 (date of the Court’s interim, non-final jury verdict judgment) to the date of final judgment, or February 27, 2024 (the date the Court signed final judgment in this case, erroneously entitled ‘Amended Judgment,’ as above), as the May 8, 2023 interim judgment is void and no longer has any force and effect by operation of law.”  The Court also denied Defendants’ request to quash  “all outstanding levies issued under the Court’s interim - and now void and unenforceable - May 8, 2023 jury verdict judgment.”  

On December 12, 2023, Jamgotchian, ESPA, and Theta filed the instant case, case no. 23STCV31285, against Coastal, Bruce Nye, and Sonja Nye for (1) slander of title, (2) quiet title, (3) defamation, (4) libel per se, (5) intentional interference with contractual relations, and (6) negligent interference with contractual relations.  Essentially, Jamgotchian and his entities have now elevated their contentions about a premature judgment to separate lawsuits.  The basis for all of their claims is that the judgment lien from BC674357 was invalid and premature, which has been rejected by the Court multiple times. 

On February 27, 2024, Jamgotchian, ESPA, and Theta filed case no. 24STCV05004 against Done! for (1) slander of title, (2) quiet title, (3) defamation, (4) libel per se, (5) intentional interference with contractual relations, and (6) negligent interference with contractual relations.  

On June 14, 2024, the Court related case nos. BC674357, 23STCV31285, and 24STCV05004. 

On September 5, 2024, the Court granted an anti-SLAPP motion filed by Coastal and the Nyes as to the entirety of the Complaint herein.

Coastal and the Nyes now seek $9,492 in attorneys’ fees as the prevailing party on their anti-SLAPP Motion.

“[A] prevailing defendant on a special motion to strike shall be entitled to recover his or her attorney’s fees and costs.”  (Code Civ. Proc. § 425.16(c).) 

No opposition was filed.

The Court finds the fee request to be reasonable.  Therefore, the Motion is granted.

Coastal to give notice.