Judge: Lee W. Tsao, Case: 23NWCV01379, Date: 2024-02-07 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23NWCV01379    Hearing Date: February 7, 2024    Dept: C

national commercial recovery v. samtex fabrics, et al.

CASE NO.:  23NWCV01379

HEARING 2/7/24 @ 9:30 AM

#6

 

Defendants’ Motion to Transfer Venue is GRANTED.

Moving Party to give NOTICE.

 

Defendants/Cross-Complainants Samtex Fabrics, Inc. (Samtex), Shimshon Kachan, and Mogjan Rahimian (collectively Defendants) move to transfer venue to Los Angeles County’s Central District, Stanley Mosk Courthouse.

No Opposition filed as of February 5, 2024.

Background

On May 3, 2023, Plaintiff National Commercial Recovery, Inc. (Plaintiff) filed a Complaint alleging a Common Count for Open Book Account and Goods Sold and Delivered and for Account Stated against Defendants. Plaintiff was assigned the rights of Shaoxing Sheng Lian Trade Co., Ltd. (Shaoxing), whose principal place of business is in China for the alleged Common Counts and Account Stated. Defendants filed a Cross-Complaint against Shaoxing alleging:

1.    Breach of Contract

2.    Breach of Implied Warranty of Merchantability

3.    Intentional Interference with Contractual Relations

4.    Intentional Interference with Prospective Economic Advantage

Judicial Notice

“Any request for judicial notice must be made in a separate document listing the specific items for which notice is requested and must comply with rule 3.1306(c).” (California Rules of Court Rule 3.1113(l).

Defendant’s request for judicial notice is denied because it was made in the memorandum and not in a separate document.

Legal Standard

“The court may, on motion, change the place of trial in the following cases … (a) When the court designated in the complaint is not the proper court.” (CCP § 397.)

Discussion

The case should be transferred to the Central District because Defendants’ reside in the Central District and the performance was to occur in China. Plaintiff’s CM-010 Form states that venue is proper in the Southeast District, Norwalk Courthouse because it is where performance was required or where the Defendants reside. Additionally, Plaintiff alleges that Samtex’s business address is 2424 E. 28th Street, Vernon, CA 90058 and Kachan and Rahimian are principal’s of Samtex. (Compl. ¶¶ 4-6.) As to the residence of Defendants, first, Plaintiff’s Proof of Service on all Defendants occurred at 356 S. Palm Dr. Beverly Hills, CA 90212 and not in the Southeast District. Second, Kachan stated that Samtex’s business address since the “beginning of 2023” is 1114-1118 E. 8th Street, Unit 201, Los Angeles, CA. (Kachan Decl., ¶ 2.) As to where performance was to occur, the payments were to be wired to Shaoxing’s bank in China. (Tabibi Decl., Ex. 1.) Plaintiff has not opposed this Motion and, thus, the Court has no evidence to weigh against Defendants’ evidence. Therefore, Defendants’ Motion to Transfer Venue to the Central District, Stanley Mosk Courthouse is granted.

 

Accordingly, Defendants’ Motion to Transfer Venue is GRANTED.