On 12/31/2015 SHAHANEH A LIMONADI filed a Property - Other Property Fraud lawsuit against IKE A NWANONENYI. 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.
****5900
12/31/2015
Pending - Other Pending
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
Stanley Mosk Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
LIMONADI LILA HAKIMI
LIMONADI SHAHANEH A.
NWANONENYI IKE A.
2/14/2018: Minute Order
4/19/2018: STATEMENT OF DAMAGES (PERSONAL INJURY OR WRONGFUL DEATH)
4/24/2018: Minute Order
5/9/2018: NOTICE RE: CONTINUANCE OF HEARING
1/30/2019: Certificate of Mailing for
1/30/2019: Minute Order
3/1/2019: Minute Order
12/31/2015: ORDER ON COURT FEE WAIVER
4/18/2016: Minute Order
5/6/2016: PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS
5/25/2016: CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
5/25/2016: PROOF OF SERVICE BY FIRST-CLASS MAIL?CIVIL
6/24/2016: Minute Order
12/1/2016: REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT
12/2/2016: Proof of Service by 1st Class Mail
8/7/2017: NOTICE RE: CONTINUANCE OF HEARING
9/15/2017: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS
10/18/2017: Minute Order
Notice of Rejection - Application for Default Judgment by Court - Contract or Tort; Filed by Clerk
at 08:30 AM in Department 74; Order to Show Cause Re: (entry of default) - Held
at 08:30 AM in Department 74; Hearing on Motion - Other ((Legacy)) - Not Held - Taken Off Calendar by Court
Minute Order ( (Order to Show Cause Re: entry of default; Hearing on Motion -...)); Filed by Clerk
at 08:30 AM in Department 74; Hearing on Motion - Other ((Legacy)) - Not Held - Continued - Court's Motion
Request for Entry of Default / Judgment; Filed by Shahaneh A. Limonadi (Plaintiff); Lila Hakimi Limonadi (Plaintiff)
Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order; Filed by Clerk
at 08:30 AM in Department 74; Order to Show Cause Re: (Dismissal for Failure to Prosecute) - Held
Minute Order ( (Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal for Failure to Prosecute)); Filed by Clerk
Notice of Hearing on Motion to Amend Pleading on Names on Original Complaint; Filed by Shahaneh A. Limonadi (Plaintiff); Lila Hakimi Limonadi (Plaintiff)
at 09:00 AM in Department 74; Case Management Conference (Conference-Case Management; Matter continued) -
Minute Order
Minute order entered: 2016-04-18 00:00:00; Filed by Clerk
Notice of Case Management Conference; Filed by Clerk
NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
Complaint; Filed by Shahaneh A. Limonadi (Plaintiff); Lila Hakimi Limonadi (Plaintiff)
ORDER ON COURT FEE WAIVER
COMPLAINT FOR: 1. FRAUD AND INTENTIONAL DECEIT; ETC
SUMMONS
ORDER ON COURT FEE WAIVER
Case Number: BC605900 Hearing Date: January 06, 2020 Dept: 74
BC605900 LIMONADI VS NWANONENYI Plaintiffs’
Request for Entry of Default Judgment; OSC re Dismissal for Failure to Obtain
Default Judgment TENTATIVE
RULING: The
request for entry of default judgment is DENIED. As this case is over four years old and Plaintiffs
have had ample opportunity to obtain default judgment, this case is DISMISSED
WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Plaintiffs’
previous request for entry of default judgment was rejected on May 21,
2019. Plaintiffs were ordered to
resubmit the default judgment package within 10 days on October 8, 2019. Plaintiffs filed a declaration pursuant to
CCP section 585 to support their request for default judgment on October 18,
2019. However, Plaintiffs did not
resubmit the default judgment package until December 9, 2019. Plaintiffs only submitted a physical copy of
the default judgment package to the Court and did not e-file the default
judgment package papers. The
declaration of mailing is not signed on the CIV-100 Form. There are also no other indications that the
request for entry of default judgment was served on Defendant. Aside
from the lack of proof of service of the request for entry of default judgment,
Plaintiffs’ CCP section 585 declarations are insufficient to support the amount
of damages sought. According to
Plaintiffs, they arrived at the value of the items listed in the statement of
damages by running a search using the Google search engine to locate pictures
of the items and the prices of the items. Plaintiffs further declare that some items brought from Iran were
treated as genuine articles and not “knock offs” and that they used the lower
values of the items purchased in the United States in order to account for the
fact that their items were not new. Plaintiffs’ declarations are insufficient to support the value of the items
as internet search results widely vary and are not reliable sources of the
value of the items. It is also unclear
whether the exact same items were found as the items are vaguely described,
some are improperly grouped together under a single total value, and there are
no search printouts of the search results to support the values set forth in
the attachments to the declarations. To
this extent, the item values set forth in the declarations are
speculative. In order to properly prove
up the value of the items and obtain the requested damages, Plaintiffs must
submit an appraisal report from an appraisal expert. Additionally,
based on the Plaintiffs’ declarations, it appears Plaintiffs are seeking a
return of the items or payment for the items by Defendant. Plaintiffs may not seek alternative remedies
at this stage of the action. Plaintiffs
must elect either a judgment entitling them to a return of their items or a
judgment entitling them to the value of the items. A
review of the proposed judgment also shows that Plaintiffs are only seeking
damages pursuant to their conversion cause of action. To this extent, Plaintiffs should submit a
request for dismissal of the first cause of action for fraud and intentional
deceit and third cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional
distress. Based
on the foregoing, the request for entry of default judgment is denied. This
case is over four years old. As
plaintiffs have had ample opportunity to obtain default judgment, this case is
dismissed without prejudice.