On 10/10/2018 PATRICIA A MCALLISTER filed a Property - Other Property Fraud lawsuit against SHADI MORISSET. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Spring Street Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is JON R. TAKASUGI. The case status is Disposed - Dismissed.
*******2680
10/10/2018
Disposed - Dismissed
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
Spring Street Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
JON R. TAKASUGI
MCALLISTER PATRICIA A.
Los Angeles, CA 90015
MORISSET SHADI
PARS PUBLIC AGENCY RETIREMENT SERVICES
PARS PUBLIC AGENCY RETIREMENT SERVICES DBA PARS- PUBLIC AGENCY RETIREMENT SERV.
PARS PUBLIC AGENCY RETIREMENT SERVICES DBA PARS PUBLIC AGENCY RETIREMENT SERVICES
PARS PUBLIC AGENCY RETIREMENT SERVICES DBA PUBLIC AGENCY RETIREMENT SERVICES DBA PARS
CORRELL LAW APC / CHASE CASH'S CHECK
CORRELL MICHELLE J.
CORRELL MICHELLE
Attorney at Correll Law APC
11601 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 2080
Los Angeles, CA 90025
9/14/2020: Notice (name extension) - Notice Notice of Request to Take Motion Off Calendar
6/2/2020: Appellate Order Dismissing Appeal - Appellate Order Dismissing Appeal NOA: 12/16/19 BV033319
7/8/2020: Minute Order - Minute Order (Court Order Re: Hearing on Motion to Dismiss)
11/20/2019: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion for Reconsideration)
12/16/2019: Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint) - Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint) PROPOSED STATEMENT ON APPEAL
12/16/2019: Proof of Service by Mail - Proof of Service by Mail "NOTICE OF APPEAL
1/6/2020: Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint) - Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)
2/10/2020: Appeal Document - Appeal Document NOA:12/16/19 BV033319
10/10/2018: Complaint - First Amended Complaint is STRICKEN on 1/23/19 (Amended)
4/26/2019: Minute Order - Minute Order (Ruling on Submitted Matter)
4/29/2019: Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling
1/31/2019: Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet Amend 2
12/31/2018: Order - Dismissal - Order - Dismissal
12/14/2018: Notice of Rejection Default/Clerk's Judgment - Notice of Rejection Default/Clerk's Judgment
10/10/2018: Summons - on Complaint
10/10/2018: Civil Case Cover Sheet
10/10/2018: Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case
DocketHearing on Motion to Dismiss scheduled for 09/21/2020 at 11:00 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25 Not Held - Vacated by Court on 09/18/2020
DocketNotice Notice of Request to Take Motion Off Calendar; Filed by: Phase II Systems (Defendant); As to: Patricia A. McAllister (Plaintiff)
DocketHearing on Motion to Dismiss scheduled for 09/21/2020 at 11:00 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25
DocketMinute Order (Court Order Re: Hearing on Motion to Dismiss)
DocketCertificate of Mailing for (Court Order Re: Hearing on Motion to Dismiss) of 07/08/2020; Filed by: Clerk
DocketAppellate Order Dismissing Appeal NOA: 12/16/19 BV033319; Filed by: Clerk
DocketMotion to Dismiss; Filed by: PARS (Public Agency Retirement Services) (Defendant)
DocketAppeal Record Delivered; Issued by: Clerk
DocketAppeal - Original Clerk's Transcript 1 - 5 Volumes Certified 1 VOL 158 PAGES; Filed by: Clerk
DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 05/12/2020 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25 Not Held - Vacated by Court on 03/27/2020
DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Patricia A. McAllister (Plaintiff)
DocketOrder on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court); Signed and Filed by: Clerk; As to: Patricia A. McAllister (Plaintiff)
DocketRequest to Waive Court Fees; Filed by: Patricia A. McAllister (Plaintiff)
DocketComplaint; Filed by: Patricia A. McAllister (Plaintiff); As to: Shadi Morisset (Defendant); PARS (Public Agency Retirement Services) (Defendant)
DocketUpdated -- Amended Complaint (1st): Status Date changed from 12/24/2018 to 10/10/2018
DocketUpdated -- First Amended Complaint is STRICKEN on 1/23/19: Status Date changed from 01/29/2019 to 10/10/2018
DocketUpdated -- Amended Complaint (3rd) (First Amended Complaint is STRICKEN on 1/23/19): Status Date changed from 03/28/2019 to 10/10/2018
DocketUpdated -- Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court): Result: Granted; Result Date: 10/10/2018; As To Parties changed from Patricia A. McAllister (Plaintiff) to Patricia A. McAllister (Plaintiff)
DocketUpdated -- Request to Waive Court Fees: Result Date changed from 10/10/2018 to 10/10/2018; As To Parties: removed
DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 10/13/2021 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94
Case Number: 18STLC12680 Hearing Date: September 21, 2020 Dept: 25
HEARING DATE: Mon., September 21, 2020 JUDGE /DEPT: Blancarte/25
CASE NAME: McAllister v. Morisset, et al. COMPL. FILED: 10-10-18
CASE NUMBER: 18STLC12680 DISC. C/O: NONE
NOTICE: OK DISC. MOT. C/O: NONE
TRIAL DATE: NOT SET
PROCEEDINGS: MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL
MOVING PARTY: Defendant Phase II Systems dba Public Agency Retirement Services
RESP. PARTY: None
MOTION TO DISMISS
(CCP § 1008; CRC 8.808)
TENTATIVE RULING:
Defendant Phase II Systems dba Public Agency Retirement Services’ Motion to Dismiss is PLACED OFF CALENDAR.
SERVICE:
[X] Proof of Service Timely Filed (CRC, rule 3.1300) OK
[X] Correct Address (CCP §§ 1013, 1013a) OK
[X] 16/21 Court Days Lapsed (CCP §§ 12c, 1005(b)) OK
OPPOSITION: None filed as of September 17, 2020 [ ] Late [X] None
REPLY: None filed as of September 17, 2020 [ ] Late [X] None
ANALYSIS:
Background & Discussion
On October 10, 2018, Plaintiff Patricia McAllister (“Plaintiff”) filed an action against Shadi Morisset (“Morisset”) and Phase II Systems dba Public Agency Retirement Services (“Public Agency”).
On April 26, 2019, the Court sustained Defendant Public Agency’s demurrer to Plaintiff’s second amended complaint without leave to amend. (4/26/19 Minute Order.) Plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration of that order on May 6, 2019, which the Court denied on November 20, 2019. (11/20/19 Minute Order.) On December 16, 2019, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Appeal of that order. Defendant Public Agency filed a Motion to Dismiss the Appeal on May 13, 2020.
On September 14, 2020, Defendant Public Agency filed a Notice to Take Motion to Dismiss Off Calendar. Accordingly, this Motion is PLACED OFF CALENDAR.
Conclusion & Order
For the foregoing reasons, Defendant Phase II Systems dba Public Agency Retirement Services’ Motion to Dismiss is PLACED OFF CALENDAR.
Moving party is ordered to give notice.
Case Number: 18STLC12680 Hearing Date: November 20, 2019 Dept: 94
McAllister v. Morisset, et al.
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
(CCP § 1008)
TENTATIVE RULING:
Plaintiff Patricia McAllister’s motion for reconsideration is DENIED.
I. Background
Plaintiff Patricia McAllister (“Plaintiff”) filed the instant action for breach of contract and fraud against Defendants Shadi Morisset and Phase II Systems, dba Public Agency Retirement Services (“Defendant”) on October 10, 2018. Following the filing of Defendant’s demurrer, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint on December 24, 2018. The First Amended Complaint was later struck as untimely. (Minute Order, dated 01/23/19.) On December 31, 2018, Plaintiff dismissed Morisset from the action with prejudice. On the same date, the Court sustained Defendant’s demurrer to the Complaint without leave as to the first cause of action for breach of contract, and with leave to amend as to the second cause of action for fraud. Plaintiff filed the Second Amended Complaint on January 29, 2019, alleging causes of action for (1) Constructive Fraud - Concealment by Fiduciary; (2) Breach of Fiduciary Duty; (3) Professional Negligence; (4) Negligent Misrepresentation (5) Emotional Distress Resulting from Financial Injury; (6) Reliance; and (7) Negligence.
Defendant filed its demurrer to the Second Amended Complaint on March 8, 2019. Instead of filing an opposition, Plaintiff filed a Third Amended Complaint on March 28, 2019.
On April 11, 2019, the Court heard from the parties regarding the demurrer. The Court took the matter under submission.
On April 26, 2018, the Court issued an order striking the Third Amended Complaint because it was improperly filed without leave of court, and sustaining the demurrer without leave to amend as to all causes of action. Specifically, the Court sustained the demurrer to the first cause of action for fraud without leave to amend because Plaintiff did not allege any facts demonstrating that her fraud cause of action is not barred by the three-year statute of limitations. Notably, the Court did not grant leave to amend because Plaintiff did not meet her burden to show how she could amend her complaint to cure the defect. The Court sustained the demurrer to the second through seventh causes of action because the Court did not grant leave to amend for these causes of action when it sustained the demurrer to the initial Complaint, instead only giving leave to amend for the fraud claim.
On May 6, 2019, Plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration of the Court’s ruling sustaining the demurrer to the second amended complaint.
On November 6, 2019, Defendant opposed.
A timely reply was due on November 13, 2019 and Plaintiff did not file a reply by that date.
II. Legal Standard
“When an application for an order has been made to a judge, or to a court, and refused in whole or in part, or granted, or granted conditionally, or on terms, any party affected by the order may, within 10 days after service upon the party of written notice of entry of the order and based upon new or different facts, circumstances, or law, make application to the same judge or court that made the order, to reconsider the matter and modify, amend, or revoke the prior order. The party making the application shall state by affidavit what application was made before, when and to what judge, what order or decisions were made, and what new or different facts, circumstances, or law are claimed to be shown.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1008, subd. (a).)
III. Discussion
The Court notes there is no Proof of Service showing service of the moving papers on Defendant. Nevertheless, Defendant opposed on the merits and therefore decides the motion on the merits.
Plaintiff argues that the Court should reconsider its ruling because Defendant violated Code of Civil Procedure, section 430.41, subdivision (b) because it demurred to an unamended portion of an amended pleading.
First, the Court denies Plaintiff’s motion because it fails to present “new or different facts, circumstances, or law.” Nor does Plaintiff attempt to do so by an affidavit “what application was made before, when and to what judge, what order or decisions were made, and what new or different facts, circumstances, or law are claimed to be shown.”
Additionally, Plaintiff could have made these arguments if she opposed Defendant’s demurrer. However, she did not. Plaintiff does not otherwise explain why she failed to do so then.
Even if Plaintiff did make those arguments, the Court would not change its ruling. The Court based its ruling on Plaintiff’s failure to cure her statute of limitation defect. Plaintiff’s motion still does not show how she would overcome this issue.
IV. Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED.
Clerk to give notice.