Judge Stephen P. Pfahler, Case 20CHCP00146 2022-08-09 Tentative Ruling

· 1^st Cause of Action: Set Aside Fraudulent Transfer Under Code of Civil Procedure section 3439.04, Subdivision (a)(1-2)

Plaintiff Larion Krazyman alleges Defendants L&J Assets, LLC and Ron Hacker transferred assets to Defendant Bag Fund, LLC in order to evade payment on a $126,000 judgment in a prior action.

On June 18, 2020, Plaintiff in pro per filed a verified complaint for intentional fraudulent transfer under Code of Civil Procedure section 3439.04, and conspiracy to defraud creditors. On June 24, 2020, Plaintiff substituted in Defendants 1538 Cahuenga Partners, LLC and Benjamin Schneider for Doe 1 and 2. On June 26, 2020, Tanya Bogorad was substituted in for Doe 3.

The clerk entered defaults against Bag Fund, LLC on July 27, 2020, L&J Assets LLC on August 17, 2020, 1538 Cahuenga Partners, LLC and Benjamin Schneider on August 18, 2020, Brandie Frazier on October 6, 2020, and Sami Sabahi on October 6, 2020.

On October 19, 2020, Plaintiff dismissed 1538 Cahuenga Partners, LLC. On October 30, 2020, the court deemed 20CHCP00146, 20VECV01008, 20VECV01237 related, with the instant action deemed the lead case.

On November 6, 2020, Plaintiff filed a peremptory challenge to Department 47. The action was transferred to Department 49 on November 10, 2020.

On September 10, 2021, the court granted the unopposed motion to vacate the default against Bag Fund, LLC.

On February 8, 2022, Plaintiff dismissed Carlos Hernandez, Lana Smith, and Marcus McDonald. On February 10, 2022, Plaintiff substituted in Eugene Underhal, Hacker Douglas, Century West Financial Corporation, Century West Films and Distribution, Intellectual Capital Management, Bag O Burgers Restaurant Group, LLC, and Lincoln Funds International, Inc., for Does 10-16.

Defendants Bag Fund, LLC and Ron Hacker filed verified answers to the complaint on March 14, 2022.

On April 27, 2022, the court sustained the unopposed demurrer to the complaint filed by Tanya Bogorad. On May 2, 2022, Plaintiff dismissed Lincoln Funds International, Inc., Century West Financial Corporation, Hacker Douglas, Bag O Burgers Group, LLC, and Century West Films & Distribution. On 5-3-22, the court entered a dismissal against Sami Sabahi, as requested by Plaintiff. On May 26, 2022, Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint to set aside fraudulent transfer under Code of Civil Procedure section 3439.04, subdivision (a)(1-2), and conspiracy to defraud creditors.[1]

Defendant Tanya Bogorad submits the subject demurrer on grounds of uncertainty in that the operative complaint continues to lack any facts regarding the alleged conduct of moving defendant. Defendant additionally challenges any claims of fraudulent conveyance in that she was neither an identified debtor in the underlying judgment or a transferee. Finally, Defendant maintains that without the underlying first cause of action, the conspiracy claim also fails.

The court electronic filing system shows no opposition. Moving party filed a notice of non-opposition, which includes a reiteration of the arguments in support of the demurrer.

The court declines to consider the extrinsic evidence as to whether Defendant was a transferee is a proper defendant or not. Nevertheless, other than identification of Bogorad in paragraphs 3 and 21 in first amended complaint, Plaintiff continues to plead insufficient facts against moving Defendant. Nothing in the operative alleges any alleged conduct by Bogorad. The court therefore sustains the unopposed demurrer with 20 days leave to amend. Plaintiff is only granted leave to add facts supporting the existing causes of action as to this defendant.

Plaintiff may NOT add any new claims or causes of action. “Following an order sustaining a demurrer or a motion for judgment on the pleadings with leave to amend, the plaintiff may amend his or her complaint only as authorized by the court's order. (Citation.) The plaintiff may not amend the complaint to add a new cause of action without having obtained permission to do so, unless the new cause of action is within the scope of the order granting leave to amend.” (Harris v. Wachovia Mortgage, FSB (2010) 185 Cal.App.4th 1018, 1023.) Defendant may file a motion to dismiss if Plaintiff fails to timely file an amended pleading.

Because the court has now twice sustained the demurrer with leave to amend, the subject ruling now counts towards the amendment limit guidelines. “In response to a demurrer and prior to the case being at issue, a complaint or cross-complaint shall not be amended more than three times, absent an offer to the trial court as to such additional facts to be pleaded that there is a reasonable possibility the defect can be cured to state a cause of action. The three-amendment limit shall not include an amendment made without leave of the court pursuant to Section 472, provided the amendment is made before a demurrer to the original complaint or cross-complaint is filed.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.41, subd. (e)(1).)

[1]On May 26, 2022, Plaintiff filed a notice of related cases for Krazyman v. Fredrickson, et al., SC105201. The subject action commenced on October 7, 2009. The court declined to deem the cases related.