This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 06/16/2019 at 10:25:22 (UTC).

CHRISTINE YU ET AL VS DAVID WAN ET AL

Case Summary

On 05/17/2016 CHRISTINE YU filed a Property - Other Property Fraud lawsuit against DAVID WAN. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****0845

  • Filing Date:

    05/17/2016

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Property - Other Property Fraud

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs and Petitioners

LEUNG ANDREW

YU CHRISTINE

Defendants and Respondents

DAVID AND WINNIE WAN FAMILY TRUST THE

YU HUA LONG INVESTMENTS LLC

HUANG TENG

WAN DAVID

MOUNTAINFIELD LLC

WAN WINNIE

DOES 1-50

MAGNUS SUNHILL GROUP LLC

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorneys

LAW OFFICES OF KENNETH I. GROSS & ASSOC.

GROSS KENNETH I.

Defendant Attorneys

CHANG ASTER C ESQ.

HSU ROBERT

 

Court Documents

Minute Order

9/5/2018: Minute Order

Opposition

10/30/2018: Opposition

Minute Order

11/13/2018: Minute Order

Answer

1/17/2019: Answer

Opposition

3/11/2019: Opposition

Case Management Statement

3/19/2019: Case Management Statement

Order

3/22/2019: Order

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES: 1. FRAUD AND MISREPRESENTATION; ETC

5/17/2016: COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES: 1. FRAUD AND MISREPRESENTATION; ETC

SUMMONS

5/17/2016: SUMMONS

Unknown

6/1/2016: Unknown

PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS

6/14/2016: PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS

DECLARATION OF ASTER C. CHANG RE: GOOD FAITH ATTEMPTS TO MEET AND CONFER PURSUANT TO CAL. CODE OF CIV. PROC. ? 430.41

7/26/2016: DECLARATION OF ASTER C. CHANG RE: GOOD FAITH ATTEMPTS TO MEET AND CONFER PURSUANT TO CAL. CODE OF CIV. PROC. ? 430.41

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES: 1. FRAUD AND MISREPRESENTATION ;ETC.

8/30/2016: FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES: 1. FRAUD AND MISREPRESENTATION ;ETC.

Unknown

9/1/2016: Unknown

Minute Order

9/7/2016: Minute Order

DEFENDANT DAVID WAN'S NOTICE OF DEMURRER AND DEMURRER TO PLAINTIFFS' FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS KND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT THEREOF

9/26/2016: DEFENDANT DAVID WAN'S NOTICE OF DEMURRER AND DEMURRER TO PLAINTIFFS' FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS KND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT THEREOF

DKCLARATION OF THOMAS D. SHAMBAUGH IN RESPONSE TO OSC RE: SERVICE

10/21/2016: DKCLARATION OF THOMAS D. SHAMBAUGH IN RESPONSE TO OSC RE: SERVICE

Minute Order

5/3/2017: Minute Order

24 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 05/01/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 78; Hearing on Motion for Stay of Proceedings - Not Held - Rescheduled by Party

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/22/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 78; Case Management Conference - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/22/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 78; Hearing on Motion for Stay of Proceedings - Held - Motion Denied

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/22/2019
  • Minute Order ( (Case Management Conference; Hearing on Motion for Stay of Pro...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/22/2019
  • Case Management Order; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/22/2019
  • Order (Ruling Re: Defendant David Wan's Motion to Stay or Dismiss); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/19/2019
  • Case Management Statement; Filed by Christine Yu (Plaintiff); Andrew Leung (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/11/2019
  • Opposition (to defendant's motion to stay or dismiss); Filed by Christine Yu (Plaintiff); Andrew Leung (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/07/2019
  • Case Management Statement; Filed by David Wan (Defendant); Winnie Wan (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/20/2019
  • Notice of Motion (AND MOTION TO STAY OR DISMISS THE PROCEEDINGS MEMORANDUMOF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATIONOF DAVIDWAN); Filed by David Wan (Defendant); David and Winnie Wan Family Trust, The (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
51 More Docket Entries
  • 06/14/2016
  • PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/01/2016
  • Receipt; Filed by Christine Yu (Plaintiff); Andrew Leung (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/01/2016
  • NOTICE OF POSTING JURY FEES

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/01/2016
  • Notice; Filed by Christine Yu (Plaintiff); Andrew Leung (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/01/2016
  • CIVIL DEPOSIT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/26/2016
  • Notice of Case Management Conference; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/26/2016
  • NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/17/2016
  • Complaint; Filed by Christine Yu (Plaintiff); Andrew Leung (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/17/2016
  • COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES: 1. FRAUD AND MISREPRESENTATION; ETC

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/17/2016
  • SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC620845    Hearing Date: January 07, 2020    Dept: 78

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 78

CHRISTINE YU, et al.,

Plaintiff,

v.

DAVID WAN., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.: BC620845

Hearing Date: January 7, 2020

[TENTATIVE] RULING RE:

Defendant David Wan’s Motion to BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL.

Attorney Kenneth Gross and Thomas Shambaugh of the Law Offices of Kenneth I. Gross & Associates’ Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel for Plaintiffs Christine Yu and Andrew Leung is GRANTED.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

This is an action for fraud. The First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) alleges as follows. Plaintiffs Christine Yu and Andrew Leung (“Plaintiffs”) in 2003 were told by Defendant David Wan (“Wan”) that he was an investor in an LLC that owned certain commercial real property that was being developed. (FAC ¶ 11.) Wan offered to let Plaintiffs buy in to his share of the LLC. (FAC ¶ 11.) Wan did not disclose that his interest was actually the interest of a trust of which he was trustee, and that this trust did not own an interest in the real property, but rather owned an interest in another LLC, Defendant Mountainfield, LLC (“Mountainfield”), and that it was this LLC that in turn owned an interest in yet another LLC, Defendant Magnus Sunhill, LLC (“Magnus”), which actually owned the real property. (FAC ¶ 13.)

Plaintiffs paid Wan $450,000 per his offer, which they would not have done if they knew they were not investing directly in the property. (FAC ¶ 14.) In fact, they were purchasing a 36% interest in the David and Winnie Wan Family Trust, which held a 38.46% interest in Mountainfield. (FAC ¶ 20.)

Mountainfield and Magnus transferred a majority interest in Magnus to Defendant Teng Huang (“Huang”) in exchange for at least $6 million, but Plaintiffs have not received a distribution of these proceeds. (FAC ¶ 15.)

In 2015, Huang transferred Magnus’s interest in the real property, its only asset, to Defendant Yu Hua Long Investments, LLC (“YHL”), for an unknown sum, less than what it was worth. (FAC ¶ 16.)

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Plaintiffs filed the original Complaint on May 17, 2016, alleging four causes of action:

  1. Fraud

  2. Failure to Qualify Securities

  3. Unfair Business Practices

  4. Violation of the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act

Plaintiffs’ counsel filed the instant Motion to be Relieved as Counsel on October 30, 2019.

No Opposition has been filed.

DISCUSSION

  1. MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL

    Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. section 284 states that “[t]he attorney in an action or special proceeding may be changed at any time before or after judgment or final determination” upon either consent of both client and attorney, or upon the order of the court under application of either the client of the attorney, after notice from one to the other. Cal. Rule of Court 3.1362 states the requirements for a motion to be relieved as counsel under Code Civ. Proc. section 284. No memorandum is required, but the motion must be accompanied by (1) a declaration stating why a motion has been brought instead of filing a consent (without compromising attorney-client confidentiality), (2) proof of service of the motion, and (3) all hearing dates scheduled in the action or proceeding, including the date of trial, if known. Additionally, “[t]he proposed order relieving counsel must be prepared on the Order Granting Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel--Civil (form MC-053) and must be lodged with the court with the moving papers.”

    The present motion pertains to attorneys Kenneth Gross and Thomas Shambaugh of the Law Offices of Kenneth I. Gross & Associates, counsel for Plaintiffs Christine Yu and Andrew Leung. The motion complies with the above requirements.

    Attorney Kenneth Gross and Thomas Shambaugh of the Law Offices of Kenneth I. Gross & Associates’ Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel for Plaintiffs Christine Yu and Andrew Leung is GRANTED.

Plaintiffs to give notice.

Dated: January 7, 2020

___________________________________

Hon. Robert S. Draper

Judge of the Superior Court