This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 07/08/2019 at 20:36:18 (UTC).

CHRISTINE PETRIKAS IRELAND ET AL VS CHARLES DUNN COMPANY INC

Case Summary

On 07/13/2015 CHRISTINE PETRIKAS IRELAND filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against CHARLES DUNN COMPANY INC. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are MARY H. STROBEL, DEBRE K. WEINTRAUB and RANDOLPH M. HAMMOCK. The case status is Disposed - Dismissed.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****8007

  • Filing Date:

    07/13/2015

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Dismissed

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Other Contract

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judges

MARY H. STROBEL

DEBRE K. WEINTRAUB

RANDOLPH M. HAMMOCK

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs and Petitioners

14426 PALMDALE ROAD LLC

IRELAND CHRISTINE PETRIKAS

PETRIKAS FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

Defendants and Respondents

CHARLES DUNN COMPANY INC.

DOES 1 THROUGH 25

HOLLYWOOD CARLTON PROPERTIES LLC

LOREN PROPERTIES LLC

MEHTA ROHIT

SOROUDI HAMID

XENON INVESTMENT CORP.

METRO EXCHANGE INCORPORATED

FRANK AKEF & CO. INC.

Not Classified By Court

TEST PARTY FOR TRUST CONVERSION

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorney

BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP

Defendant and Respondent Attorneys

RYAN GREGORY R. ESQ.

PAULY ANDREW S. ESQ.

MANNING & KASS ELLROD RAMIREZ TRESTER

GENGA JOHN M. ESQ.

GOOCH FRANK III ESQ.

O'MEARA FRANCES ESQ.

 

Court Documents

PLAINTIFFS' EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS TO DECLARATION OF GREGORY R. RYAN, ESQ. IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS FOLLOWING INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL

3/26/2018: PLAINTIFFS' EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS TO DECLARATION OF GREGORY R. RYAN, ESQ. IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS FOLLOWING INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL

NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

7/15/2015: NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

9/14/2015: NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEY

12/14/2015: SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEY

SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEY

12/14/2015: SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEY

NOTICE OF JOINDER OF DEFENDANTS ROHIT MEHTA, XENON INVESTMENT CORP., HOLLYWOOD CARLTON PROPERTIES, LLC, AND LOREN PROPERTIES LLC IN MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION OF DEFENDANTS CHARLES DUNN COMPANY, INC

12/15/2015: NOTICE OF JOINDER OF DEFENDANTS ROHIT MEHTA, XENON INVESTMENT CORP., HOLLYWOOD CARLTON PROPERTIES, LLC, AND LOREN PROPERTIES LLC IN MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION OF DEFENDANTS CHARLES DUNN COMPANY, INC

DEFENDANT FRANK AKEF & CO., INC.'S ANSWER TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

1/8/2016: DEFENDANT FRANK AKEF & CO., INC.'S ANSWER TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

CIVIL DEPOSIT

1/15/2016: CIVIL DEPOSIT

PLAINTIFFS' OBJECTION TO THE NEW EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN THE REPLY OF DEFENDANTS CHARLES DUNN COMPANY, INC. AND HAMID SOROUDI, AND SURREPLY IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO COMPEL ARBIT

1/25/2016: PLAINTIFFS' OBJECTION TO THE NEW EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN THE REPLY OF DEFENDANTS CHARLES DUNN COMPANY, INC. AND HAMID SOROUDI, AND SURREPLY IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO COMPEL ARBIT

Minute Order

2/2/2016: Minute Order

DECLARATION OF BLYTHE GOLAY IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' OPPOSITION TO THE MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION OF DEFENDANTS ROHIT MEHTA, XENON INVESTMENT CORP., HOLLYWOOD CARLTON PROPERTIES, LLC, AND LOREN PRO

2/18/2016: DECLARATION OF BLYTHE GOLAY IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' OPPOSITION TO THE MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION OF DEFENDANTS ROHIT MEHTA, XENON INVESTMENT CORP., HOLLYWOOD CARLTON PROPERTIES, LLC, AND LOREN PRO

NOTICE OF DEFAULT (UNLIMITED CIVIL APPEALS)

5/2/2016: NOTICE OF DEFAULT (UNLIMITED CIVIL APPEALS)

ORDER AND STIPULATION TO CONTINUE ?PLAINTIFFS? MOTION FOR ORDER REQUIRING PARTIES TO ENGAGE IN CODE CIV. PROC. ? 1281.6 PROCEDURE FOR APPOINTMENT OF ARBITRATOR, FOR ARBITRATION WITH DEFENDANTS ROHIT M

7/13/2016: ORDER AND STIPULATION TO CONTINUE ?PLAINTIFFS? MOTION FOR ORDER REQUIRING PARTIES TO ENGAGE IN CODE CIV. PROC. ? 1281.6 PROCEDURE FOR APPOINTMENT OF ARBITRATOR, FOR ARBITRATION WITH DEFENDANTS ROHIT M

CHARLES DUNN COMPANY, INC'S AND HAMID SOROUDI?S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS? MOTION FOR ORDER REQUIRING PARTIES TO ENGAGE IN CODE CIV. PROC. 1281.6

8/5/2016: CHARLES DUNN COMPANY, INC'S AND HAMID SOROUDI?S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS? MOTION FOR ORDER REQUIRING PARTIES TO ENGAGE IN CODE CIV. PROC. 1281.6

Minute Order

3/2/2017: Minute Order

SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEY

6/9/2017: SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEY

DECLARATION OF GREGORY R. RYAN, ESQ. IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS FOLLOWING INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL

12/7/2017: DECLARATION OF GREGORY R. RYAN, ESQ. IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS FOLLOWING INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL

Minute Order

12/13/2017: Minute Order

147 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 06/11/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 47, Randolph M. Hammock, Presiding; Post-Arbitration Status Conference ( and Lifting of the Stay) - Held - Continued

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/11/2019
  • Minute Order ( (Post-Arbitration Status Conference and Lifting of the Stay)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/13/2018
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 47, Randolph M. Hammock, Presiding; Status Conference - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/13/2018
  • Notice (of Continuance of Status Conference); Filed by Christine Petrikas Ireland (Plaintiff); Petrikas Family Limited Partnership (Plaintiff); 14426 Palmdale Road, LLC (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/13/2018
  • Minute Order ((Status Conference Re Arbitration and Lifting the Stay)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/09/2018
  • at 08:31 AM in Department 47; Hearing on Motion for Attorney Fees (MOTION - ATTORNEY FEES; Denied without prejudice) -

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/09/2018
  • Minute Order

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/09/2018
  • Minute order entered: 2018-04-09 00:00:00; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/09/2018
  • MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS FEES

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/09/2018
  • Miscellaneous-Other; Filed by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
339 More Docket Entries
  • 08/28/2015
  • Challenge To Judicial Officer - Cause (170.1/170.3); Filed by Charles Dunn Company, Inc. (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/15/2015
  • NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/15/2015
  • NOTICE OF PENDENCY OF ACTION AFFECTING REAL PROPERTY

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/15/2015
  • Notice; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/15/2015
  • NOTICE OF PENDENCY OF ACTION AFFECTING REAL PROPERTY

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/15/2015
  • Notice; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/15/2015
  • Notice of Case Management Conference; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/13/2015
  • Complaint; Filed by Christine Petrikas Ireland (Plaintiff); Petrikas Family Limited Partnership (Plaintiff); 14426 Palmdale Road, LLC (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/13/2015
  • COMPLAINT FOR: 1. BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY; ETC

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/13/2015
  • SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC588007    Hearing Date: January 24, 2020    Dept: 47

Christine Petrikas Ireland v. Charles Dunn Company, Inc., et al.

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiffs Christine Petrikas Ireland, an individual and as trustee of the Petrikas Family Bypass Trust and the Petrikas Family Survivor Trust; Petrikas Family Limited Partnership; and 14426 Palmdale Road, LLC

RESPONDING PARTY(S): Defendants Frank Akef & Co., Inc. and Frank Akef (Doe 1); Metro Exchange, Inc.; Reza Akef (Doe 2); and Neda Akef (Doe 3).

STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS AND/OR PROCEEDINGS:

Plaintiffs alleges that Defendants breached fiduciary duties owed to Plaintiffs in connection with real estate transactions in order to obtain commissions.

This Court (Judge Weintraub presiding) granted Defendants’ motion to compel arbitration in part and denied it in part. The Court of Appeal reversed the portion of the order denying arbitration and ordered the trial court to grant the motion to compel arbitration in its entirety. On September 12, 2019, following arbitration, the stay was lifted as to the two remaining defendants who were not part of the arbitration, Metro Exchange and Frank Akef & Company. On October 22, 2019, Plaintiffs named three Doe defendants.

Plaintiffs now seek leave to file a second amended complaint.

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiffs Christine Petrikas Ireland, an individual and as trustee of the Petrikas Family Bypass Trust and the Petrikas Family Survivor Trust; Petrikas Family Limited Partnership; and 14426 Palmdale Road, LLC’s motion for leave to file a second amended complaint is GRANTED.

Plaintiffs are to file a stand-alone copy of the second amended complaint today. The second amended complaint shall be deemed served as of the date of this order. Defendants are to respond within 30 days of the service of this order.

DISCUSSION:

Motion for Leave To File Second Amended Complaint

Plaintiff seeks leave to amend the complaint to supplement existing causes of action against Defendants Metro Exchange and Frank Akef & Co. and to add causes of action based on alter ego liability against recently named Defendants Frank Akef, Reza Akef, and Neda Akef.

The Court may, in furtherance of justice, and on such terms as may be proper, allow a party to amend any pleading. (CCP § 473(a)(1).) Amendments of pleadings can be permitted up to and during trial, absent prejudice to the adverse party. (Atkinson v. Elk Corp. (2003) 109 Cal.App.4th 739, 761.) Judicial policy favors liberal exercise of the discretion to permit amendment of the pleadings. (Royal Thrift & Loan Co. v. County Escrow, Inc. (2004) 123 Cal.App.4th 24, 41-42.) Absent prejudice to the Defendants, a denial of leave to amend is an abuse of discretion. (Kittridge Sports Co. v. Superior Court (1989) 213 Cal.App.3d 1045, 1048.)

The Declaration of Attorney Michael R. Matthias substantially complies with CRC Rule 3.1324, which requires a declaration setting forth the effect of the amendments, why the amendments are necessary and proper, when the facts giving rise to the amended allegations were discovered, and the reason why the request for amendment was not made earlier. (CRC Rule 3.1324(a)(2), (3)). The proposed additions and changes are set forth in the proposed 2AC attached as Exhibit A to the Matthias Declaration.

Although pleadings may be amended at any stage of the litigation (Moss Estate Co. v. Adler (1953) 41 Cal.2d 581, 585–586 [261 P.2d 732]; Record v. Reason (1999) 73 Cal.App.4th 472, 486 [86 Cal. Rptr. 2d 547]), if a party seeking amendment has been dilatory and/or the delay has prejudiced or will prejudice the opposing party, the trial court in its discretion may deny leave to amend. (See Solit v. Tokai Bank (1999) 68 Cal.App.4th 1435, 1448 [81 Cal. Rptr. 2d 243].)

(M&F Fishing, Inc. v. Sea-Pac Ins. Managers, Inc. (2012) 202 Cal. App. 4th 1509, 1534.)

Here, Defendants have not demonstrated prejudice that would justify denial of leave to amend. Where an additional theory of liability is proposed against an existing defendant, this does not constitute prejudice that justifies the denial of leave to amend. (See Hirsa v. Superior Court (1981) 118 Cal.App.3d 486, 490.) “[I]t is irrelevant that new legal theories are introduced as long as the proposed amendments ‘relate to the same general set of facts.’” (Atkinson v. Elk Corp. (2003) 109 Cal.App.4th 739, 761.) Plaintiff’s new allegations in the 2AC are based on the same general set of facts as the original causes of action. Nor will the changes to the names of the Plaintiff trusts cause Defendants any prejudice. (Declaration of Marc L. Benezra ¶ 5.)

In addition, the the newly named Defendants have not demonstrated prejudice in connection with Plaintiffs’ new alter ego allegations. Plaintiffs had already alleged agency – a related concept – in the first amended complaint, and the newly named Defendants were substituted as Doe defendants as to that complaint. (1AC ¶ 17.) Under the circumstances, allowing the amendment is appropriate. (Mesler v. Bragg Management Co. (1985) 39 Cal.3d 290, 297 [holding that the trial court “should have permitted plaintiff to plead the alter ego issue,” in part because “[a]gency, a related concept, had been alleged in plaintiff's original complaint, to which defendant had been substituted as a Doe”].) Indeed, a trial court may amend a judgment to include alter egos as judgment debtors, even when the plaintiff did not allege alter ego liability in the underlying lawsuit. (Misik v. D’Arco (2011) 197 Cal.App.4th 1065, 1074-1075.) It stands to reason that an amendment to allege alter ego liability a year before trial will not prejudice the Defendants.

Defendants’ arguments regarding the statute of limitations would be more appropriately raised, if at all, by demurrer, although the Court notes that it is not apparent from the face of the complaint that the allegations set forth in the second amended complaint are time-barred.

Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ motion for leave to file a second amended complaint is GRANTED. Plaintiffs are to file a stand-alone copy of the second amended complaint today. The second amended complaint shall be deemed served as of the date of this order. Defendants are to respond within 30 days of the service of this order.

Moving party to give notice, unless waived.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 24, 2020 ___________________________________

Randolph M. Hammock

Judge of the Superior Court

Any party may submit on the tentative ruling by contacting the courtroom via email at Smcdept47@lacourt.org