This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 09/25/2021 at 05:02:54 (UTC).

OLD REPUBLIC SURETY COMPANY, A CORPORATION VS HOME SAVING TERMITE CONTROL, INC., A CORPORATION, ET AL.

Case Summary

On 10/15/2019 OLD REPUBLIC SURETY COMPANY, A CORPORATION filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against HOME SAVING TERMITE CONTROL, INC , A CORPORATION. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Spring Street Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is SERENA R. MURILLO. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******9554

  • Filing Date:

    10/15/2019

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Other Contract

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Judge

SERENA R. MURILLO

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

OLD REPUBLIC SURETY COMPANY A CORPORATION

Defendants

MASON CHUCK

REIMERS MARIA

HOME SAVING TERMITE CONTROL INC. A CORPORATION

WICKS FLOYD E.

TASLIMI CONSTRUCTION CO. INC. A CORPORATION

HANSEN KARIN

HORTON GEORGE

BIEBER EVE

FRANKEL STEVEN

MIRA KAREN

LAPPEN DAVID

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

PAGAN JOHN

 

Court Documents

Other - (name extension) - Other - Written Claim and Declaration

9/23/2021: Other - (name extension) - Other - Written Claim and Declaration

Minute Order - Minute Order (Non-Jury Trial;)

8/17/2021: Minute Order - Minute Order (Non-Jury Trial;)

Notice (name extension) - Notice of Continued Hearing on Motion to Deposit

3/25/2021: Notice (name extension) - Notice of Continued Hearing on Motion to Deposit

Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion - Other to Deposit by Stakeholder)

3/24/2021: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion - Other to Deposit by Stakeholder)

Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint) - Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

10/15/2020: Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint) - Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

Proof of Personal Service - Proof of Personal Service

10/20/2020: Proof of Personal Service - Proof of Personal Service

Memorandum of Points & Authorities - Memorandum of Points & Authorities

9/1/2020: Memorandum of Points & Authorities - Memorandum of Points & Authorities

Proof of Personal Service - Proof of Personal Service

4/15/2020: Proof of Personal Service - Proof of Personal Service

Request for Dismissal - Request for Dismissal

1/16/2020: Request for Dismissal - Request for Dismissal

Request for Entry of Default / Judgment - Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

1/3/2020: Request for Entry of Default / Judgment - Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

Affidavit (name extension) - Affidavit of Reasonable Diligence

12/30/2019: Affidavit (name extension) - Affidavit of Reasonable Diligence

Request for Entry of Default / Judgment - Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

12/5/2019: Request for Entry of Default / Judgment - Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

Affidavit (name extension) - Affidavit of Reasonable Diligence

12/5/2019: Affidavit (name extension) - Affidavit of Reasonable Diligence

Proof of Mailing (Substituted Service) - Proof of Mailing (Substituted Service)

11/18/2019: Proof of Mailing (Substituted Service) - Proof of Mailing (Substituted Service)

Amendment to Complaint (Fictitious/Incorrect Name) - Amendment to Complaint (Fictitious/Incorrect Name)

11/18/2019: Amendment to Complaint (Fictitious/Incorrect Name) - Amendment to Complaint (Fictitious/Incorrect Name)

Summons - Summons on Complaint

10/15/2019: Summons - Summons on Complaint

Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

10/15/2019: Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

10/15/2019: First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

33 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 11/10/2021
  • Hearing11/10/2021 at 09:30 AM in Department 26 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Hearing - Other (name extension)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/23/2021
  • DocketOther - Written Claim and Declaration; Filed by: David Lappen (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/15/2021
  • DocketHearing - Other to Determine Disposition of Interpleader Funds scheduled for 11/10/2021 at 09:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 26

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/09/2021
  • DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by: Old Republic Surety Company, a corporation (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/17/2021
  • DocketMinute Order (Non-Jury Trial;)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/17/2021
  • DocketCertificate of Mailing for (Non-Jury Trial;) of 08/17/2021; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/17/2021
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 08/17/2021 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 26 Not Held - Taken Off Calendar by Court on 08/17/2021

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/19/2021
  • DocketNotice of Ruling on Motion to Deposit and Notice of Trial; Filed by: Old Republic Surety Company, a corporation (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/13/2021
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 08/17/2021 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 26

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/13/2021
  • DocketMinute Order (Non-Jury Trial; Hearing on Motion - Other to Deposit by Stake...)

    Read MoreRead Less
49 More Docket Entries
  • 11/18/2019
  • DocketProof of Personal Service; Filed by: Old Republic Surety Company, a corporation (Plaintiff); As to: Maria Reimers (Defendant); Service Date: 10/25/2019; Service Cost: 65.00; Service Cost Waived: No

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/22/2019
  • DocketAmendment to Complaint (Fictitious/Incorrect Name); Filed by: Old Republic Surety Company, a corporation (Plaintiff); As to: Karin Hansen (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/16/2019
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 04/13/2021 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/16/2019
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 10/18/2022 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/16/2019
  • DocketCase assigned to Hon. Serena R. Murillo in Department 94 Stanley Mosk Courthouse

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/15/2019
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by: Old Republic Surety Company, a corporation (Plaintiff); As to: Home Saving Termite Control, Inc., a corporation (Defendant); Taslimi Construction Co., Inc., a corporation (Defendant); Maria Reimers (Defendant) et al.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/15/2019
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Old Republic Surety Company, a corporation (Plaintiff); As to: Home Saving Termite Control, Inc., a corporation (Defendant); Taslimi Construction Co., Inc., a corporation (Defendant); Maria Reimers (Defendant) et al.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/15/2019
  • DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: Old Republic Surety Company, a corporation (Plaintiff); As to: Home Saving Termite Control, Inc., a corporation (Defendant); Taslimi Construction Co., Inc., a corporation (Defendant); Maria Reimers (Defendant) et al.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/15/2019
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/15/2019
  • DocketFirst Amended Standing Order; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: 19STLC09554    Hearing Date: April 13, 2021    Dept: 26

Old Republic Surety Co. v. Home Saving Termite Control, Inc., et al.

MOTION TO DEPOSIT BY STAKEHOLDER, FOR DISCHARGE OF STAKEHOLDER, FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES; AND FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

(CCP §§ 386, 386.5)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff Old Republic Surety Company’s Motion to Deposit by Stakeholder; for Discharge of Stakeholder; and Request for Attorney’s Fees is GRANTED. INTERPLEADER FUNDS OF $10,500.00 ARE TO BE DEPOSITED WITH THE COURT WITHIN 30 DAYS. Trial is continued to August 17, 2021 at 8:30 am in Department 26 in the Spring Street Courthouse.

ANALYSIS:

On October 15, 2019, Plaintiff Old Republic Surety Company (“Plaintiff”) initiated this interpleader action against Defendants Home Saving Termite Control, Inc. (“Defendant HSTC”), Taslimi Construction, Co., Inc., Maria Reimers, Chuck Mason and Floyd E. Wicks. Several other individual defendants were later added to the action by “Doe” amendment.

This action arises from a dispute over construction Bond No. W150185355 (the “Bond”) in the penal sum of $12,500.00. (Compl., ¶7.) Pursuant to the Application and Indemnity Agreement, Defendant HSTC allegedly agreed to indemnify Plaintiff in exchange for issuance of the Bond. (Id. at ¶¶6-7.) The remaining Defendants are alleged to have made claims on the Bond. (Id. at ¶¶6, 14.)

Plaintiff filed the instant Motion to Deposit by Stakeholder, for Discharge of Stakeholder, for Attorney’s Fees and for Temporary Restraining Order (the “Motion”) on September 1, 2020. The Motion initially came for hearing on March 24, 2021, at which time the matter was continued for Plaintiff to address the status of Defendants HSTC and Karen Mira, neither of whom have been served. On March 25, 2021, Plaintiff dismissed Defendants HSTC and Karen Mira from the Complaint without prejudice.

To date, no opposition has been filed.

Legal Standard

Interpleader is a procedure whereby a person holding money or personal property to which conflicting claims are being made by others, or may be made, can join the adverse claimants and force them to litigate their claims among themselves. (Code Civ. Proc., § 386, subd. (b).) Hancock Oil Co. v. Hopkins (1944) 24 Cal.2d 497, 508 (i.e., an escrow-holder who receives conflicting demands from the parties to the escrow regarding the funds or documents he or she holds); City of Morgan Hill v. Brown (1999) 71 Cal.App.4th 1114, 1122.)

Once the stakeholder’s right to interplead is established and he or she deposits the money or personal property in court, he or she may be discharged from liability to any of the claimants. This enables the stakeholder to avoid multiplicity of actions, and the risk of inconsistent results if each of the claimants were to sue him or her separately. (Cantu v. Resolution Trust Corp. (1992) 4 Cal.App.4th 857, 874; City of Morgan Hill, supra, 71 Cal.App.4th at 1122.)

“An interpleader action is traditionally viewed as two suits: one between the stakeholder and the claimants to determine the stakeholder's right to interplead, and the other among the claimants to determine who shall receive the funds interpleaded ... As against the stakeholder, claimants may raise only matters which go to whether the suit is properly one for interpleader; i.e., whether the elements of an interpleader action are present.” (State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Pietak (2001) 90 Cal.App.4th 600, 612.)

The stakeholder may seek reimbursement for its costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred.

(UAP-Columbus JV 326132 v. Nesbitt (1991) 234 Cal.App.3d 1028, 1036.) The court may order payment thereof out of the funds deposited by the stakeholder. (Ibid.) Ultimately, such payment may be charged to one or more of the adverse claimants in the final judgment. (Code Civ. Proc., § 386.6.)

Finally, the Court may issue an “order restraining all parties to the action from instituting or further prosecuting any other proceeding in any court in this state affecting the rights and obligations as between the parties to the interpleader until further order of the court.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 386, subd. (f).)

Discussion

Plaintiff’s request to be discharged from liability on the first cause of action for interpleader is granted. All claimants have been served with the Summons and Complaint, served with the instant motion, answered, are in default, or were dismissed from the action. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 386 and 386.5.) The subject matter of this action is a bond in the amount of $12,500.00. Currently, Plaintiff cannot determine the validity of the conflicting demands that have been made. (Motion, Pagan Decl., ¶¶7-8 and Exh. 2.) Upon deposit of the funds to the court, Plaintiff may be discharged from further liability and the Court hereby enters a restraining order to prevent the prosecution of other actions affecting the rights and obligations as between the parties to the interpleader. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 386.5, 386, subd. (f).)

Furthermore, the fees and costs sought by Plaintiff are proper. Plaintiff’s counsel has expended substantial attorneys’ fees and costs bringing this action and protecting itself from liability. Specifically, Plaintiff’s counsel filed the instant action and motion, served all Defendants, entered default or dismissed a number of those Defendants, will appear at the instant hearing, will deposit the bond, and has sought to preserve the surplus funds. (Motion, Pagan Decl., ¶6 and Exh. 1.) Fees and costs are awarded to Plaintiff in the amount of $2,000.00. (Ibid.)

Conclusion

Plaintiff Old Republic Surety Company’s Motion to Deposit by Stakeholder; for Discharge of Stakeholder, Request for Attorney’s Fees and for Temporary Restraining Order is GRANTED. INTERPLEADER FUNDS OF $10,500.00 ARE TO BE DEPOSITED WITH THE COURT WITHIN 30 DAYS. Trial is continued to August 17, 2021 at 8:30 am in Department 26 in the Spring Street Courthouse.

Moving party to give notice.

Case Number: 19STLC09554    Hearing Date: March 24, 2021    Dept: 26

Old Republic Surety Co. v. Home Saving Termite Control, Inc., et al.

MOTION TO DEPOSIT BY STAKEHOLDER, FOR DISCHARGE OF STAKEHOLDER, FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES; AND FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

(CCP §§ 386, 386.5)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff Old Republic Surety Company’s Motion to Deposit by Stakeholder; for Discharge of Stakeholder; Request for Attorney’s Fees; and Temporary Restraining Order is CONTINUED TO APRIL 13, 2021 AT 10:30 AM IN THE SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE. AT LEAST NINE (9) COURT DAYS PRIOR TO THE NEW HEARING DATE, PLAINTIFF IS TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL PAPERS ADDRESSING THE STATUS OF DEFENDANTS HOME SAVING TERMITE CONTROL, INC. AND KAREN MIRA.

ANALYSIS:

On October 15, 2019, Plaintiff Old Republic Surety Company (“Plaintiff”) initiated this interpleader action against Defendants Home Saving Termite Control, Inc. (“Defendant HSTC”), Taslimi Construction, Co., Inc., Maria Reimers, Chuck Mason and Floyd E. Wicks. Several other individual defendants were later added to the action by “Doe” amendment.

This action arises from a dispute over construction Bond No. W150185355 (the “Bond”) in the penal sum of $12,500. (Compl. ¶7.) Pursuant to the Application and Indemnity Agreement, Defendant HSTC allegedly agreed to indemnify Plaintiff in exchange for issuance of the Bond. (Id. ¶¶6-7.) The remaining Defendants are alleged to have made claims on the Bond. (Id. at ¶¶6, 14.)

Plaintiff filed the instant Motion to Deposit by Stakeholder, for Discharge of Stakeholder, for Attorney’s Fees, and for Temporary Restraining Order (the “Motion”) on September 1, 2020. To date, no opposition has been filed.

Legal Standard

Interpleader is a procedure whereby a person holding money or personal property to which conflicting claims are being made by others, or may be made, can join the adverse claimants and force them to litigate their claims among themselves. (Code Civ. Proc., § 386, subd. (b).) Hancock Oil Co. v. Hopkins (1944) 24 Cal.2d 497, 508 (i.e., an escrow-holder who receives conflicting demands from the parties to the escrow regarding the funds or documents he or she holds); City of Morgan Hill v. Brown (1999) 71 Cal.App.4th 1114, 1122.)

Once the stakeholder’s right to interplead is established and he or she deposits the money or personal property in court, he or she may be discharged from liability to any of the claimants. This enables the stakeholder to avoid multiplicity of actions, and the risk of inconsistent results if each of the claimants were to sue him or her separately. (Cantu v. Resolution Trust Corp. (1992) 4 Cal.App.4th 857, 874; City of Morgan Hill, supra, 71 Cal.App.4th at 1122.)

“An interpleader action is traditionally viewed as two suits: one between the stakeholder and the claimants to determine the stakeholder's right to interplead, and the other among the claimants to determine who shall receive the funds interpleaded ... As against the stakeholder, claimants may raise only matters which go to whether the suit is properly one for interpleader; i.e., whether the elements of an interpleader action are present.” (State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Pietak (2001) 90 Cal.App.4th 600, 612.)

The stakeholder may seek reimbursement for its costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred. 

(UAP-Columbus JV 326132 v. Nesbitt (1991) 234 Cal.App.3d 1028, 1036.) The court may order payment thereof out of the funds deposited by the stakeholder. (Ibid.) Ultimately, such payment may be charged to one or more of the adverse claimants in the final judgment. (Code Civ. Proc., § 386.6.)

Finally, the Court may issue an “order restraining all parties to the action from instituting or further prosecuting any other proceeding in any court in this state affecting the rights and obligations as between the parties to the interpleader until further order of the court.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 386, subd. (f).)

Discussion

It would be inappropriate to grant Plaintiff’s request to be discharged from liability on the cause of action for interpleader at this time. No proof of service has been filed as to Defendant HSTC. Plaintiff has only filed two declarations of Affidavits of Reasonable Diligence. (Affidavit of Reasonable Diligence, filed 12/30/20 and 1/24/20.) Nor is there any proof of service as to Defendant Karen Mira, who was added to the action on August 28, 2020. Until those two parties are properly served and brought into the action, or dismissed, Plaintiff cannot be discharged from the action. 

Therefore, Plaintiff Old Republic Surety Company’s Motion to Deposit by Stakeholder; for Discharge of Stakeholder; Request for Attorney’s Fees; and Temporary Restraining Order is CONTINUED TO APRIL 13, 2021 AT ____ AM IN THE SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE. AT LEAST NINE (9) COURT DAYS PRIOR TO THE NEW HEARING DATE, PLAINTIFF IS TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL PAPERS ADDRESSING THE STATUS OF DEFENDANTS HOME SAVING TERMITE CONTROL, INC. AND KAREN MIRA.

Moving party to give notice. 

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where HOME SAVING TERMITE CONTROL INC. A CORPORATION is a litigant

Latest cases where TASLIMI CONSTRUCTION CO. INC. is a litigant

Latest cases where OLD REPUBLIC SURETY COMPANY, INC. is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer PAGAN JOHN