This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 06/28/2019 at 00:57:53 (UTC).

RAMI ALKALAY VS THUYANN NGO ET AL

Case Summary

On 07/28/2015 RAMI ALKALAY filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against THUYANN NGO. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is TERESA SANCHEZ-GORDON. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****9471

  • Filing Date:

    07/28/2015

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Other Contract

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

TERESA SANCHEZ-GORDON

 

Party Details

Plaintiff, Petitioner and Cross Defendant

ALKALAY RAMI

Defendants, Respondents and Cross Plaintiffs

DOES 1 THROUGH 10

DOES 1 TO 10

HERNANDEZ JUAN JOSE

NGO THUYANN

NUNO JUAN JOSE HERNANDEZ

STALLION NATURAL RESOURCES GROUP

STALLION NATURAL STONES LLC

STONELION GROUP LLC

HERNANDEZ JUAN JOSE AKA JUAN JOSE HERNANDEZ NUNO

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorneys

PETER D. GORDON & ASSOCIATES

GAUMER CHRISTIE LEE ESQ.

GORDON PETER DAVID

Defendant Attorneys

MORRIS JAMES G. ESQ.

PHILHOWER KRISTEN H.

Other Attorneys

ANDRADE JAMES KIRBY

 

Court Documents

Minute Order

2/28/2018: Minute Order

ORDER OVERRULING DEMURRER

4/10/2018: ORDER OVERRULING DEMURRER

ANSWER OF CROSS-DEFENDANT RAMI ALKALAY TO SECOND AMENDED CROSS-COMPLAINT BY THUY NGO AND JUAN JOSE HERNANDEZ

4/20/2018: ANSWER OF CROSS-DEFENDANT RAMI ALKALAY TO SECOND AMENDED CROSS-COMPLAINT BY THUY NGO AND JUAN JOSE HERNANDEZ

Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel

10/23/2018: Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel

Order Granting Attorney"s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil

11/26/2018: Order Granting Attorney"s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil

Notice

1/15/2019: Notice

SUMMONS

7/28/2015: SUMMONS

PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

8/27/2015: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

Minute Order

3/17/2016: Minute Order

DECLARATION OF PETER D. GORDON RE: NOTICE OF EX PARTE APPLICATION AND AFFIDAVIT OF FAULT FOR MISSING DEFAULT JUDGMENT HEARING

6/7/2016: DECLARATION OF PETER D. GORDON RE: NOTICE OF EX PARTE APPLICATION AND AFFIDAVIT OF FAULT FOR MISSING DEFAULT JUDGMENT HEARING

REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO SET ASIDE ENTRY OF DEFAULT AND JUDGMENT

7/25/2017: REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO SET ASIDE ENTRY OF DEFAULT AND JUDGMENT

Summons on Cross Complaint

8/2/2017: Summons on Cross Complaint

Minute Order

9/20/2017: Minute Order

CROSS-DEFENDANTS' RAMI ALKALAY'S REPLY RE DEMURRER AND MOTION TO STRIKE CROSS-COMPLAINT'S THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

9/29/2017: CROSS-DEFENDANTS' RAMI ALKALAY'S REPLY RE DEMURRER AND MOTION TO STRIKE CROSS-COMPLAINT'S THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

CROSS-COMPLAINANTS' FIRST AMENDED CROSS-COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR: 1. BREACH OF WRITTEN CONTRACT; ETC.

10/16/2017: CROSS-COMPLAINANTS' FIRST AMENDED CROSS-COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR: 1. BREACH OF WRITTEN CONTRACT; ETC.

NOTICE OF CONTINUANCE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFFRENFNCE

10/30/2017: NOTICE OF CONTINUANCE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFFRENFNCE

Minute Order

11/9/2017: Minute Order

86 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 06/06/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 74; Hearing on Ex Parte Application (To Continue Trial, FSC and Related Dates) - Held - Motion Granted

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/06/2019
  • Stipulation and Order (To Continue Trial, FSC and Related Dates); Filed by Rami Alkalay (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/06/2019
  • Minute Order ( (Hearing on Ex Parte Application To Continue Trial, FSC and Re...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/06/2019
  • Ex Parte Application (To Continue Trial, FSC and Related Dates); Filed by Rami Alkalay (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/18/2019
  • at 10:00 AM in Department 74; Jury Trial - Not Held - Continued - Party's Motion

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/08/2019
  • at 08:31 AM in Department 74; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Continued - Party's Motion

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/25/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 74; Hearing on Ex Parte Application ( to Continue Trial Date) - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/25/2019
  • Minute Order ( (Hearing on Ex Parte Application to Continue Trial Date)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/21/2019
  • Ex Parte Application (Ex Parte Application to Continue Trial Date); Filed by Thuyann Ngo (Defendant); Juan Jose Hernandez (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/15/2019
  • Notice (Notice of Unavailability); Filed by Thuyann Ngo (Defendant); Juan Jose Hernandez (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
180 More Docket Entries
  • 08/27/2015
  • Proof-Service/Summons; Filed by Rami Alkalay (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/27/2015
  • PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/27/2015
  • PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/27/2015
  • PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/27/2015
  • PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/29/2015
  • NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/29/2015
  • Notice of Case Management Conference; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/28/2015
  • COMPLAINT-CONTRACT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/28/2015
  • SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/28/2015
  • Complaint; Filed by Rami Alkalay (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC589471    Hearing Date: March 05, 2020    Dept: 74

BC589471 RAMI ALKALAY VS THUYANN NGO

Defendants/Cross-Complainants Thuy Ngo and Juan Jose Hernandez’ Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement

TENTATIVE RULING: The motion is denied. Moving party to give notice.

The case has not been dismissed, and jury trial remains set for May 4, 2020.

The agreement is a complete settlement agreement which provides the extractor will be paid from the sales of the product. The contract proposed by the extractor requires a $300,000 deposit prior to beginning extraction of the product to pay for the product. It also requires the parties to pay for the product upon removal from the quarry. These terms are not in conformity with the settlement agreement.

The court finds that defendants have not fully performed under the settlement agreement. The complaint cannot be dismissed by the court at this time.