Judge: Theresa M. Traber, Case: 24STCV04726, Date: 2025-06-05 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV04726    Hearing Date: June 5, 2025    Dept: 47

Tentative Ruling

 

Judge Theresa M. Traber, Department 47

 

 

HEARING DATE:     June 5, 2025               TRIAL DATE: August 25, 2025

                                                          

CASE:                         First Capitol Consulting, Inc. v. Lilis, Inc.

 

CASE NO.:                 24STCV04726           

 

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

 

MOVING PARTY:               Plaintiff First Capitol Consulting, Inc.

 

RESPONDING PARTY(S): No response on eCourt as of June 2, 2025

 

STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS AND/OR PROCEEDINGS:

           

            This is an action for breach of contract that was filed on February 26, 2024. Plaintiff was contracted by Defendant to provide tax consulting services to obtain specified tax credits. Plaintiff alleges that, although the specified credits were obtained, Defendant never paid Plaintiff for services rendered.

 

Plaintiff moves for summary judgment.

           

TENTATIVE RULING:

 

Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED. This ruling does not address Plaintiff’s entitlement to attorney’s fees and costs of suit and is without prejudice to a procedurally proper motion seeking an award of those fees and costs.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Plaintiff moves for summary judgment.

 

Legal Standard

 

The function of a motion for summary judgment or adjudication is to allow a determination as to whether an opposing party can show evidentiary support for a pleading or claim and, if not, to enable an order of summary dismissal without the need for trial. (Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 843.) Code of Civil Procedure Section 437c(c) “requires the trial judge to grant summary judgment if all the evidence submitted, and ‘all inferences reasonably deducible from the evidence’ and uncontradicted by other inferences or evidence, show that there is no triable issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”  (Adler v. Manor Healthcare Corp. (1992) 7 Cal.App.4th 1110, 1119.)  “The function of the pleadings in a motion for summary judgment is to delimit the scope of the issues; the function of the affidavits or declarations is to disclose whether there is any triable issue of fact within the issues delimited by the pleadings.” (Juge v. County of Sacramento (1993) 12 Cal.App.4th 59, 67, citing FPI Development, Inc. v. Nakashima (1991) 231 Cal. App. 3d 367, 381-82.)

 

As to each claim as framed by the complaint, the plaintiff moving for summary judgment must satisfy the initial burden of proof by presenting proving each element of a cause of action. (Code Civ Proc. § 437c(p)(1).) Courts “liberally construe the evidence in support of the party opposing summary judgment and resolve doubts concerning the evidence in favor of that party.” (Dore v. Arnold Worldwide, Inc. (2006) 39 Cal.4th 384, 389.) Once the plaintiff has met that burden, the burden shifts to the defendant to show that a triable issue of one or more material facts exists as to that cause of action or a defense thereto. (Code Civ. Proc. § 437c(p)(1).) To establish a triable issue of material fact, the party opposing the motion must produce substantial responsive evidence. (Sangster v. Paetkau (1998) 68 Cal.App.4th 151, 166.)

 

Breach of Contract Claim

 

            Plaintiff moves for summary judgment on its claim for breach of contract.

 

To prevail on a claim for breach of contract, a plaintiff must plead and prove the contract, the plaintiff’s performance of the contract or excuse for nonperformance, Defendant’s breach, and finally the resulting damage. (Otworth v. Southern Pac. Transportation Co. (1985) 166 Cal.App.3d 452, 458.)

 

            Plaintiff performs consulting services for its clients to receive tax credits under the federal Employee Tax Credit Program. (Separate Statement of Undisputed Material Fact No. 1.) Plaintiff, doing business as Trusaic, entered into a written agreement on August 13, 2021, with Defendant, doing business as My Greek Kitchen, to perform consulting services for Defendant to qualify for those tax credits. (SSUMF No. 6.) The parties agreed that Plaintiff was to be paid 20% of the tax credits generated for Defendant. (SSUMF Nos. 7-8.) To that end, Plaintiff prepared tax documents on Defendant’s behalf, which resulted in Defendant’s receipt of $180,697.58 in tax credit for the 2020 and 2021 tax years across five financial quarters. (SSUMF Nos. 9-10.) Plaintiff submitted invoices to Defendant for the agreed-upon 20% payment for each of the quarterly tax credits, for a total sum of $36,139.52, but Defendant never paid the invoices.  (SSUMF Nos. 12-14.) Section 2.2 of the General Terms and Conditions of the Agreement requires Defendant to pay 1.5% monthly interest on an outstanding balance, accruing each month following receipt of an invoice. (SSUMF No. 28.) Plaintiff calculates the outstanding interest pursuant to that provision as $22,056.83. (SSUMF No. 29.)

            Plaintiff has furnished the Court with evidence establishing the existence of a valid contract, performance of Plaintiff’s obligations to obtain tax credits for Defendant, Defendant’s breach of the contract by failing to pay the agreed-upon price for those services, and resulting damages in the form of the outstanding unpaid funds plus interest as specified in the contract. As Defendant has not responded to this motion, Plaintiff has offered evidence establishing each element of its claim, and Defendant has not demonstrated a triable issue of fact as to any element of the claim. Plaintiff is therefore entitled to summary judgment on the merits of the action.

 

Attorney’s Fees

 

            Plaintiff also requests that the Court award attorney’s fees on this summary judgment motion. No such relief is authorized by Code of Civil Procedure section 437c, which only permits resolution of a cause of action, issue of duty, claim for damages under Civil Code section 3294, or affirmative defense. (See Code Civ. Proc. § 437c subds. (a), (f), (t).) An award of attorney’s fees is properly sought via a separately noticed motion following the conclusion of litigation on the merits. The Court therefore declines to address Plaintiff’s request for attorney’s fees on this motion, without prejudice to a subsequent motion to separately resolve that issue.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED. This ruling does not address Plaintiff’s entitlement to attorney’s fees and costs of suit and is without prejudice to a procedurally proper motion seeking an award of those fees and costs.

 

Moving Party to give notice.

 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 

Dated:  June 5, 2025                           ___________________________________

                                                                                    Theresa M. Traber

                                                                                    Judge of the Superior Court

 


            Any party may submit on the tentative ruling by contacting the courtroom via email at Smcdept47@lacourt.org by no later than 4:00 p.m. the day before the hearing. All interested parties must be copied on the email. It should be noted that if you submit on a tentative ruling the court will still conduct a hearing if any party appears. By submitting on the tentative you have, in essence, waived your right to be present at the hearing, and you should be aware that the court may not adopt the tentative, and may issue an order which modifies the tentative ruling in whole or in part.

 



Website by Triangulus