Judge: Nathan R. Scott, Case: Spizzirri v. Baptiste, Date: 2022-09-30 Tentative Ruling

Defendants Barry Baptiste, Craig Baptiste, Bert Liverance, Clay Absher, Mach-1 Autogroup, LLC, and Mach-1 RSMH, LLC fka Mach-1 Family Honda LLC’s motion for summary judgment/adjudication is denied.

Issue #1, defendants’ duty to plaintiffs.  Defendants fail to show they owed no duty to preserve the value of the asset – Auto Orange II – they obtained in enforcing the ultimately-reversed judgment.  (See See Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subds. (a), (p)(2) [burden]; Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 850-851 [same]; see also Defs. Add’l SSUF #14, 16.)

“[A]fter reversal of a judgment under which a party obtained possession he is in the position of a trustee of the property and the one so dispossessed is ‘... entitled to restitution of all the things lost by reason of the judgment in the lower court ... where justice requires it.’”  (Erickson v. Boothe (1954) 127 Cal.App.2d 644, 648.)

“After reversal the respondent stands in the position of a trustee for the appellant of the property obtained under the judgment. He must handle that property as an ordinarily prudent man of business would . . . .”  (Stockton Theatres, Inc. v. Palermo (1953) 121 Cal.App.2d 616, 620.)

Defendants thus failed to show they owed no duty to plaintiffs to exercise reasonable care over Auto Orange

Issue #2, breach.   As reasonableness is generally a jury issue, triable issues of material fact exist as to whether defendants breached their duty by failing to exercise reasonable care.  (See Erickson, supra, 127 Cal.App.2d at pp. 648-649 [liability for failure to “exercise . . . due and reasonable care, diligence, and prudence]; Stockton Theatres, supra, 121 Cal.App.2d at p. 620 [no liability for when “act[ing] in good faith and with common skill, prudence, and diligence”]; see also Pls. resp. to Defs. SSUF # 35, 42, 49, 55; Pls. Add’l SSUF #65-67, 70-72, 79-86.) 

Issue #3, tax-return damages.  It is not clear this issue is amenable to summary adjudication absent stipulation.  (Compare Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (f)(1) with subd. (t).)   Even if it is, triable issues exist.  (See Pl. resp. to Defs. SSUF #56.) 

Issue #4, alter egos.  Triable issues exist.  (See Pl. resp. to Defs. SSUF #57-58.)    

The court declines to rule on defendants’ objections to plaintiffs’ evidence, which are immaterial to the disposition of the motion. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (q).)

Defendants shall give notice.