Search

Attributes

This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 06/16/2019 at 11:42:55 (UTC).

SHERREL INVESTMENT GROUP, LLC VS G.H. COOPER PROPERTIES

Case Summary

On 02/19/2016 SHERREL INVESTMENT GROUP, LLC filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against G H COOPER PROPERTIES. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Santa Monica Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is MITCHELL L. BECKLOFF. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****5434

  • Filing Date:

    02/19/2016

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Other Contract

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Santa Monica Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

MITCHELL L. BECKLOFF

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs and Defendants

SHERREL INVESTMENT GROUP LLC

STRAIGHT CREEK INVESTMENT GROUP LLC

VILLAGE WEST INVESTMENT GROUP LLC

SINGER CHILDREN'S 2002 IRREVOCABLE TRUST

SINGER MICHAEL

SINGER JEFFREY

Defendants

G.H. COOPER PROPERTIES INC.

SHERREL INVESTMENT GROUP LLC

STRAIGHT CREEK INVESTMENT GROUP LLC

VILLAGE WEST INVESTMENT GROUP LLC

DAVID J. PASTERNAK ESQ

GRAYSON TODD

JEFFREY AND KELLIE SINGER CHILDRENS TRUST

COOPER SHERYL

SINGER FAMILY TRUST

R SINGER TRUST

GRAYSON SHERYL

SINGER 1995 FAMILY TRUST

Other

ROBINS & KAPLAN

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorneys

MARTIN GREGG A.

MICHELMAN & ROBINSONLLP

Defendant Attorneys

DLA PIPER LLP

ROBINS & KAPLAN

GIRTEN JODI LEE

LEVENE NEALE BENDER RANKIN&BRILL

KAUFMAN DOLOWICH VOLUCK & GONZO LLP

WOLF RIFKIN SHAPIRO SCHULMAN & RABKIN

FREDMAN LIEBERMAN PEARL LLP

GEIBELSON MICHAEL A.

 

Court Documents

Summons

2/19/2016: Summons

Unknown

2/19/2016: Unknown

Case Management Statement

5/3/2019: Case Management Statement

Order Appointing Court Approved Reporter as Official Reporter Pro Tempore

5/29/2018: Order Appointing Court Approved Reporter as Official Reporter Pro Tempore

Unknown

7/11/2018: Unknown

Unknown

7/11/2018: Unknown

Unknown

7/11/2018: Unknown

Unknown

7/11/2018: Unknown

Other -

7/24/2018: Other -

Objection

7/26/2018: Objection

Response

7/26/2018: Response

Proof of Personal Service

7/26/2018: Proof of Personal Service

Order Appointing Court Approved Reporter as Official Reporter Pro Tempore

8/6/2018: Order Appointing Court Approved Reporter as Official Reporter Pro Tempore

Unknown

8/13/2018: Unknown

Notice

9/6/2018: Notice

Notice of Ruling

9/13/2018: Notice of Ruling

Stipulation and Order

10/29/2018: Stipulation and Order

Notice of Ruling

2/22/2019: Notice of Ruling

65 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 05/21/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department P; Case Management Conference - Held - Continued

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/21/2019
  • Minute Order ( (Case Management Conference)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/03/2019
  • Case Management Statement; Filed by Todd Grayson (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/03/2019
  • Case Management Statement; Filed by Michael Singer (Plaintiff); Jeffrey Singer (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/03/2019
  • Case Management Statement; Filed by ESQ David J. Pasternak (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/10/2019
  • Stipulation and Order (Stipulation And [proposed] Order To Extend Deadline To Respond To Ghcp's Crosscomplaint And File Anti-slapp Motions); Filed by Michael Singer (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/26/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department M; Hearing on Motion for Summary Judgment - Not Held - Vacated by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/22/2019
  • Notice of Ruling; Filed by Michael Singer (Plaintiff); Jeffrey Singer (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/21/2019
  • Notice of Ruling; Filed by Michael Singer (Plaintiff); Jeffrey Singer (Plaintiff); Jeffrey and Kellie Singer Childrens Trust (Defendant) et al.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/20/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department P; Case Management Conference - Held - Continued

    Read MoreRead Less
479 More Docket Entries
  • 02/19/2016
  • Ex-Parte Application; Filed by Sherrel Investment Group, LLC (Plaintiff); Straight Creek Investment Group, LLC (Plaintiff); Village West Investment Group, LLC (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/19/2016
  • Declaration; Filed by Sherrel Investment Group, LLC (Plaintiff); Straight Creek Investment Group, LLC (Plaintiff); Village West Investment Group, LLC (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/19/2016
  • Declaration; Filed by Sherrel Investment Group, LLC (Plaintiff); Straight Creek Investment Group, LLC (Plaintiff); Village West Investment Group, LLC (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/19/2016
  • Declaration; Filed by Sherrel Investment Group, LLC (Plaintiff); Straight Creek Investment Group, LLC (Plaintiff); Village West Investment Group, LLC (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/19/2016
  • Declaration; Filed by Sherrel Investment Group, LLC (Plaintiff); Straight Creek Investment Group, LLC (Plaintiff); Village West Investment Group, LLC (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/19/2016
  • Declaration; Filed by Sherrel Investment Group, LLC (Plaintiff); Straight Creek Investment Group, LLC (Plaintiff); Village West Investment Group, LLC (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/19/2016
  • Miscellaneous-Other; Filed by Sherrel Investment Group, LLC (Plaintiff); Straight Creek Investment Group, LLC (Plaintiff); Village West Investment Group, LLC (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/19/2016
  • Declaration; Filed by G.H. Cooper Properties, Inc. (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/19/2016
  • Ex-Parte Application; Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/19/2016
  • Declaration (OF RICHARD LESTER IN SUPPORT OF TRP AND OSC RE PRELIM. INJUNCT. ); Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: SC125434    Hearing Date: January 26, 2021    Dept: P

Tentative Ruling

Michael Singer et al. v. G.H. Cooper Properties, Inc. et al., Case No. SC125940; Sherrell Investment Group et. Al. v. G.H. Cooper Properties, Inc., Case No. SC125434 (related cases)

Hearing Date January 26, 2021

Defendant Todd Grayson’s Motions for Summary Judgment (UNOPPOSED)

A defendant is entitled to summary judgment if moving party shows “there is no triable issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. §437c. If a party has already moved for summary judgment on an issue, that party may file a renewed motion based on “newly discovered facts or circumstances or a change of law supporting the issues reasserted in the summary judgment motion.” Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. §437c(f)(2). Defendant Grayson previously moved for summary judgment on September 13, 2018 in case no. SC125940. That motion was denied. Grayson renews the motion due to newly discovered facts and documents.

Alter Ego

Alter ego liability exists when the party asserting it shows (1) a unity of interest and ownership between the entity and the individual such that corporate separateness never exists, (2) there would be an inequitable result if the alleged acts were treated as the entity’s alone. Sonora Diamond Corp. v. Super. Ct. (2000) 83 Cal.App.4th 523, 539. Courts generally refuse to impose alter ego liability in the absence of an ownership interest. E.g. Las Palmas Associates v. Las Palmas Center Associates (1992) 235 Cal.App.3d 1220, 1249. A “unity of interest” can be shown with factors including, but not limited to, inadequate capitalization and comingling of assets, the use of the same office and employees, failure to observe corporate formalities, and comingling of personal and corporate assets. Morrison Knudsen Corp. v. Hancock, Rothert & Bunshoft (1999) 69 Cal.App.4th 223, 251.

In both cases, several of plaintiffs’ causes of action arise out of alleged violations of GHCP’s operating agreement and/or the trust agreement. See Sherrell complaint ¶¶68-74, 82-86, 95-100, 109-114, Singer complaint ¶¶81-88, 107-112, 89-106, 119-146. Neither party disputes that Grayson was not a party to either agreement. Therefore, his liability depends on plaintiffs’ theory that GHCP was his alter ego.

Grayson provides evidence that he never had an ownership interest in GHCP. Defendant’s separate statement Sherrell no. 2. Ownership is generally required before alter ego liability can be imposed. Additionally, defendant argues plaintiffs’ discovery responses and document production show GHCP was adequately capitalized and Grayson did not comingle his own funds with GHCP’s funds. Separate Statement Sherrell 5-20. This cuts against a finding of alter ego liability and is sufficient to shift the summary judgment burden to plaintiffs. Since plaintiffs do not oppose this motion, the motion is GRANTED.

DUE TO THE ONGOING COVID-19 PANDEMIC, PARTIES AND COUNSEL ARE ENCOURAGED TO APPEAR VIA LA COURT CONNECT.

Case Number: SC125434    Hearing Date: October 30, 2019    Dept: P

 

Los Angeles County Superior Court, West District, Department P

TENTATIVE RULING

Sherrel Investment Group, LLC. V. G.H. Cooper Properties, Inc. Case No.: SC125434

Plaintiffs’ Motion to Dissolve Stipulated Preliminary Injunction

Hearing Date: 10/30/2019

Plaintiffs were members of various LLCs; defendant GHCP was manager. Plaintiffs alleged GHCP improperly distributed the LLCs’ assets. Plaintiffs and GHCP stipulated to a preliminary injunction preventing distribution until the litigation concluded. The matter has resolved, and plaintiffs move to dissolve the injunction and distribute assets. Defendant Grayson, a former executive of the LLCs, opposes the dissolution, alleging he is entitled to payments from GHCP and the LLCs.

Under Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. §553, the court may “on notice modify or dissolve an injunction or temporary restraining order upon a showing that there has been a material change in the facts upon which the injunction or temporary restraining order was granted.” The parties’ settlement – approved by both this court and a bankruptcy court -- represents such a “material change in the facts.”

Grayson opposes the dissolution, arguing a distribution would hamper his ability to obtain indemnification from GHCP or recover payments he claims he is owed from the LLCs. Opposition at pgs. 12-13. Grayson was not a party to the stipulation that created the injunction, nor was the injunction issued to protect Grayson’s interest in the entities’ funds.

Grayson’s claims that he is owed payments are speculative and not at issue. He has not sued to enforce his entitlement to indemnity or payments, nor has he sought a preliminary injunction. It would be improper to allow him to “piggy back” on the existing injunction created by the other parties or to block its dissolution. Additionally, as the injunction was created by stipulation, it is reasonable and equitable that it be similarly dissolved by stipulation. GRANTED.

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where Robins Kaplan, LLP is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer MARTIN GREGG ADAM