SOLVING YOUR PROBLEMSLegal Help You Can Use
Granted: Lis Pendens Expunged
The Superior Court recently granted our Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens, filed in a lawsuit between two neighbors over an allegation that our client cut down trees on the plaintiff's property.
Plaintiffs filed and recorded a lis pendens in an effort to prevent our clients from selling the home that they had recently rehabbed. Although the dispute centered only on money damages arising from the cutting of trees, plaintiffs attempted to argue that a boundary dispute existed. At the hearing, even when we represented that we accepted the plaintiffs' survey, opposing counsel still argued for the lis pendens. The lis pendens was clearly an attempt to extort a larger settlement by holding the property hostage.
The Court granted our motion and expunged the lis pendens. The property was then immediately sold. The parties are now in the process of settling the case.
Steve Young at the Boy Scouts Business Leaders Breakfast
Tony Baird (Markun, Zusman & Compton LLP), Andrew Tashjian (CB Richard Ellis), Craig Moody (Andrews & Associates International), Ryan Martinez (Bernstein Global Wealth Management).
THE LEGAL HELP YOU NEEDReal Estate and Business Litigation
Granted: Lawsuit Is Dismissed
In another case a Los Angeles Superior Court judge recently granted our motion for reconsideration, reheard a prior demurrer and reversed its ruling. The court sustained (granted) our demurrer without leave to amend (meaning plaintiff cannot come back and try again).
Our prior demurrer argued that the plaintiff was collaterally estopped from suing our client on a fraudulent conveyance cause of action since the alleged conveyor had already gone to trial and was not found to be a judgment debtor. The court denied our motion and the Appellate Court dismissed our writ of mandate.
We later demurrered on behalf of the conveyor based on res judicata, arguing that he had already gone to trial and had won. He therefore could not be liable in this lawsuit on the same allegations. The court sustained our demurrer without leave to amend with regard to this defendant. The court recognized that it had made an error on its first ruling and asked us to seek a rehearing.
The court recognized that because it had dismissed the alleged conveyor, our other client (who received the conveyance) could therefore not be liable. On a re-hearing our client was dismissed and judgment was entered in favor of both of our clients.