Judge: Stephen I. Goorvitch, Case: 22STCV07878, Date: 2025-05-07 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV07878    Hearing Date: May 7, 2025    Dept: 82

Raj Hair International Pvt. Ltd.                             Case No. 22STCV07878

v.                                                                     Hearing: May 7, 2025

                                                                        Location: Stanley Mosk Courthouse

                                                                                    Department: 82                                                  Extensions Plus, Inc., et al.                                              Judge: Stephen I. Goorvitch

[Tentative] Order Granting Application for Writ of Attachment  

INTRODUCTION

            Plaintiff Raj Hair International Pvt. Ltd. (“Plaintiff”) moves for a writ of attachment against Defendant Extensions Plus, Inc. (“Defendant”) in the amount of $2,625,980.50.  Defendant has not opposed the application, which is granted. 

LEGAL STANDARD

“Upon the filing of the complaint or at any time thereafter, the plaintiff may apply pursuant to this article for a right to attach order and a writ of attachment by filing an application for the order and writ with the court in which the action is brought.”  (Code Civ. Proc.

§ 484.010.)  “Except as otherwise provided by statute, an attachment may be issued only in an action on a claim or claims for money, each of which is based upon a contract, express or implied, where the total amount of the claim or claims is a fixed or readily ascertainable amount not less than five hundred dollars ($500) exclusive of costs, interest, and attorney's fees.”  (Code Civ. Proc. § 483.010.) 

The court shall issue a right to attach order if the court finds all of the following: 

(1)   The claim upon which the attachment is based is one upon which an attachment may be issued. 

(2)   The plaintiff has established the probable validity of the claim upon which the attachment is based. 

(3)   The attachment is not sought for a purpose other than the recovery on the claim upon which the attachment is based. 

(4)   The amount to be secured by the attachment is greater than zero.  

(Code Civ. Proc. § 484.090.) 

“A claim has ‘probable validity’ where it is more likely than not that the plaintiff will obtain a judgment against the defendant on that claim.”  (Code Civ. Proc. § 481.190.)  “The application shall be supported by an affidavit showing that the plaintiff on the facts presented would be entitled to a judgment on the claim upon which the attachment is based.” ¿(Code Civ. Proc. § 484.030.)¿ “In contested applications, the court must consider the relative merits of the positions of the respective parties and make a determination of¿the probable outcome of the litigation.”  (Hobbs v. Weiss (1999) 73 Cal.App.4th 76, 80.) 

EVIDENTIARY ISSUES

            Plaintiff’s requests judicial notice of an order granting its motion for summary adjudication of its cause of action for breach of contract against Defendant.  The request is granted per Evidence Code section 452(c). 

DISCUSSION

A.        Probable Validity of Plaintiff’s Claim – The court (Hobbes, J.) granted Plaintiff’s motion for summary adjudication of its cause of action for breach of contract against Defendant.  The court found that Defendant is liable for $1,575,065.50 in damages and $1,050,615 in prejudgment interest for a total of $2,625,680.50.  This is sufficient to establish probable validity of the claim.  Plaintiff also reasonably requests $300 in legal costs, for a total attachment of $2,625,980.50.  Defendant has not filed an opposition and has not rebutted this evidence.

B.        Basis for Attachment – Plaintiff’s application for writ of attachment is based on a contract claim for which the total amount allegedly due is in excess of $500.  The claim is not secured by real property.  Plaintiff’s damages are fixed and readily ascertainable from the May 2018 Agreement.  (Cherian Decl. ¶ 5.)  This is sufficient.   

C.        Purpose and Amount of Attachment – Code of Civil Procedure section 484.090 states that the Court shall issue a right to attach order if “the attachment is not sought for a purpose other than the recovery on the claim upon which the attachment is based . . . [and] the amount to be secured by the attachment is greater than zero.”  Plaintiff has satisfied this requirement.    

D.        Reduction of Amount to be Secured – Defendant has not argued, or shown, that the amount of attachment should be reduced pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 483.015(b).

E.         Exemptions – Defendant has not claimed any exemptions. 

F.         Subject Property – Plaintiff requests attachment of any property of Defendant, a corporation.  (Application ¶ 9.)  That request is proper.  “[A]ll corporate property for which a method of levy is provided by Article 2 (commencing with Section 488.300) of Chapter 8” may be attached.  (Code Civ. Proc. § 487.010(a).) 

G.        Undertaking – Code of Civil Procedure section 489.210 requires the plaintiff to file an undertaking before issuance of a writ of attachment.  Section 489.220 provides, with exceptions, for an undertaking in the amount of $10,000.  Neither party has argued for a different amount of undertaking.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

            Based upon the foregoing, the court orders as follows:

            1.         Plaintiff’s application for a writ of attachment in the amount of $2,625,980.50 is granted.

            2.         Plaintiff shall post an undertaking of $10,000.

            3.         Plaintiff’s counsel shall provide notice and file proof of service with the court. 

IT IS SO ORDERED 

Dated: May 7, 2025               

                                                                                    ______________________

                                                                                    Stephen I. Goorvitch

                                                                                    Superior Court Judge