This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 01/06/2021 at 19:00:43 (UTC).

CONSTRUCTURE INC VS FASSBERG CONTRACTING CORP

Case Summary

On 06/26/2017 CONSTRUCTURE INC filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against FASSBERG CONTRACTING CORP. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are AMY D. HOGUE and MONICA BACHNER. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****6346

  • Filing Date:

    06/26/2017

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Other Contract

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judges

AMY D. HOGUE

MONICA BACHNER

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs and Petitioners

CONSTRUCTURE INC

CONSTRUCTURE INC.

Respondents and Defendants

FASSBERG CONTRACTING CORP

DOES 1 TO 100

FASSBERG CONTRACTING CORP.

US BANK

WILSHIRE-CORONADO DEVELOPMENT CORP.

AMERICAN CONTRACTORS INDEMNITY COMPANY

S&S MANAGEMENT A CALIFORNIA LLC

Defendant and Cross Plaintiff

FASSBERG CONTRACTING CORP.

Cross Defendants and Plaintiffs

PLATTE RIVER INSURANCE COMPANY

CONSTRUCTURE INC.

Intervenor

PERI FORMWORK SYSTEMS INC.

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorneys

LLANETA BEN ESQ

CABAL MAC W.

Respondent and Defendant Attorneys

RAISIN & KAVCIOGLU

CORONEL KENNETH HOWARD

KAVCIOGLU ARMENAK BRANSON JR.

ESQ. ANGELA M. ROSSI

YOUSSEF MOHAMED AMR

BRADLEY BARRY ALAN

Defendant and Cross Plaintiff Attorneys

KAVCIOGLU ARMENAK BRANSON JR.

KAVCIOGLU AREN

Cross Defendant Attorney

BUCHANAN NATASHA KAMDAR

Intervenor Attorney

JOHNSON & BERTRAM

 

Court Documents

FASSBERG CONTRACTING CORPORATION'S CROSS-COMPLAINT FOR (1) BREACH OF CONTRACT AND (2) RECOVERY UNDER LICENSE BOND

3/15/2018: FASSBERG CONTRACTING CORPORATION'S CROSS-COMPLAINT FOR (1) BREACH OF CONTRACT AND (2) RECOVERY UNDER LICENSE BOND

PLAINTIFF CONSTRUCTURE, INC'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR: 1. BREACH OF CONTRACT; ETC

7/3/2017: PLAINTIFF CONSTRUCTURE, INC'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR: 1. BREACH OF CONTRACT; ETC

Motion to Continue Trial Date - MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL DATE AND ALL RELATED DEADLINES

8/29/2019: Motion to Continue Trial Date - MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL DATE AND ALL RELATED DEADLINES

Request for Dismissal

9/12/2019: Request for Dismissal

Opposition - OPPOSITION FASSBERG CONTRACTING CORPORATION'S OPPOSITION TO S&S MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC'S MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL; DECLARATION OF AREN KAVCIOGLU

9/13/2019: Opposition - OPPOSITION FASSBERG CONTRACTING CORPORATION'S OPPOSITION TO S&S MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC'S MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL; DECLARATION OF AREN KAVCIOGLU

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (POST-MEDIATION STATUS CONFERENCE)

9/16/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (POST-MEDIATION STATUS CONFERENCE)

Reply - REPLY TO OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL

9/19/2019: Reply - REPLY TO OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (MOTION OF CROSS-DEFENDANT, S & S MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC, TO...)

9/26/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (MOTION OF CROSS-DEFENDANT, S & S MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC, TO...)

Notice of Ruling - NOTICE OF RULING NOTICE OF RULING ON S&S MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC'S MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL

9/26/2019: Notice of Ruling - NOTICE OF RULING NOTICE OF RULING ON S&S MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC'S MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (NUNC PRO TUNC ORDER)

9/26/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (NUNC PRO TUNC ORDER)

Stipulation and Order - STIPULATION AND ORDER STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE POST-MEDIATION STATUS CONFERENCE SET FOR JANUARY 15, 2020

1/13/2020: Stipulation and Order - STIPULATION AND ORDER STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE POST-MEDIATION STATUS CONFERENCE SET FOR JANUARY 15, 2020

Notice - NOTICE CONSTRUCTURE'S NOTICE OF CONTINUED POST-MEDIATION STATUS CONFERENCE

1/14/2020: Notice - NOTICE CONSTRUCTURE'S NOTICE OF CONTINUED POST-MEDIATION STATUS CONFERENCE

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER)

1/14/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER)

Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (COURT ORDER) OF 01/14/2020

1/14/2020: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (COURT ORDER) OF 01/14/2020

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER)

3/23/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER)

Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (COURT ORDER) OF 03/23/2020

3/23/2020: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (COURT ORDER) OF 03/23/2020

Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (COURT ORDER) OF 04/08/2020

4/8/2020: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (COURT ORDER) OF 04/08/2020

Stipulation and Order - STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE TRIAL

4/8/2020: Stipulation and Order - STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE TRIAL

149 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 06/07/2021
  • Hearing06/07/2021 at 10:00 AM in Department 71 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/28/2021
  • Hearing05/28/2021 at 09:00 AM in Department 71 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Final Status Conference

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/03/2021
  • Hearing02/03/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department 71 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Post-Mediation Status Conference

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/15/2021
  • Hearing01/15/2021 at 11:00 AM in Department 71 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Informal Discovery Conference (IDC)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/18/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 71, Monica Bachner, Presiding; Hearing on Ex Parte Application (To Advance the Hearing Date on Its Motion to Compel Deposition of George M. Eshaghian) - Held - Motion Granted

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/18/2020
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Hearing on Ex Parte Application To Advance the Hearing Date o...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/18/2020
  • DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by S&S Management, a California LLC (Defendant on defendant's claim)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/17/2020
  • DocketEx Parte Application (To Advance the Hearing Date on Its Motion to Compel Deposition of George M. Eshaghian); Filed by S&S Management, a California LLC (Defendant on defendant's claim)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/17/2020
  • DocketProof of Service (not Summons and Complaint) (Amended); Filed by S&S Management, a California LLC (Defendant on defendant's claim)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/11/2020
  • Docketat 1:40 PM in Department 71, Monica Bachner, Presiding; Nunc Pro Tunc Order

    Read MoreRead Less
275 More Docket Entries
  • 06/26/2017
  • DocketSUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/26/2017
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by Constructure Inc. (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/26/2017
  • DocketCOMPLAINT FOR: 1. BREACH OF CONTRACT; ETC

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/26/2017
  • DocketMinute Order

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/26/2017
  • DocketMinute order entered: 2017-06-26 00:00:00; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/26/2017
  • DocketEx-Parte Application; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/26/2017
  • DocketOPPOSITION TO APPLICATION FOR TRO

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/26/2017
  • DocketOpposition Document; Filed by Defendant/Respondent

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/26/2017
  • DocketDeclaration; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/26/2017
  • DocketPLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR TRO

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

b'

Case Number: BC666346 Hearing Date: July 9, 2021 Dept: 71

\r\n\r\n

Superior\r\nCourt of California

\r\n\r\n

County\r\nof Los Angeles

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

DEPARTMENT 71

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

TENTATIVE RULING

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n\r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n
\r\n

CONSTRUCTURE,\r\n INC., a California corporation,

\r\n

\r\n

vs.

\r\n

\r\n

FASSBERG\r\n CONTRACTING CORP., a California corporation, et al.

\r\n
\r\n

Case No.: \r\n BC666346

\r\n

\r\n

\r\n

\r\n

\r\n

Hearing Date: July 9, 2021

\r\n
\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Cross-Defendant\r\nS&S Management Services LLC’s motion for leave to file a cross-complaint\r\ngranted.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Cross-Defendant S&S Management\r\nServices LLC (“S&S”) moves for leave to file a cross-complaint as to Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant\r\nConstructure, Inc. (“Constructure”) in this action. (C.C.P. §§428.10(b), 428.50(c).) S&S moves to file this permissive\r\ncross-complaint against Constructure on the grounds that the causes of action asserted\r\ntherein arise out of the same transaction and occurrence and that the interests\r\nof justice will be served by allowing its filing. (Notice of Motion, pgs. 1-2.)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Constructure filed the instant action\r\nagainst Defendant Fassberg Contracting Corp. (“Fassberg”) for compensation\r\narising from work Constructure performed during construction of an apartment building\r\nat 2525 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles (“the Project”), for which Fassberg was\r\nhired as a General Contractor and subcontracted concrete and rebar work to\r\nConstructure. In its cross-complaint, Fassberg\r\nalleged Constructure delayed the Project, failed to meet deadlines, and\r\nultimately abandoned the Project forcing Fassberg to replace Constructure. While S&S was not named in the Constructure’s\r\ncomplaint, first amended complaint (“FAC”), or operative second amended complaint\r\n(“SAC”), on March 29, 2018, Fassberg filed its operative first amended cross-complaint\r\n(“FAXC”) against Constructure, S&S (for the first time), and others for\r\nbreach of contract, recovery under license bond, and breach of contract based on\r\nallegations that S&S was acting in joint-venture with Constructure and/or\r\nwas Constructure’s alter ego with respect to the Project. S&S answered Fassberg’s FAXC on June 26,\r\n2019. On June 11, 2021, S&S filed\r\nthe instant motion for leave to pursue crossclaims for indemnity and breach of\r\ncontract against Constructure on the grounds that any liability on the part of\r\nS&S is due to the acts or omissions of Constructure.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

C.C.P. §428.10(b) provides, in pertinent\r\npart, as follows: “A party against whom a cause of action has been asserted in a…\r\ncross-complaint may file a cross-complaint setting forth… [a]ny cause of action\r\nhe has against a person alleged to be liable thereon, whether or not such\r\nperson is already a party to the action, if the cause of action asserted in his\r\ncross-complaint (1) arises out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series\r\nof transactions or occurrences as the cause brought against him or (2) asserts\r\na claim, right, or interest in the property or controversy which is the subject\r\nof the cause brought against him.”

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

C.C.P. §428.50\r\nprovides, as follows:

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

(a) \r\nA party shall file a cross-complaint against any of the parties who\r\nfiled the complaint or cross-complaint against him or her before or at the same\r\ntime as the answer to the complaint or cross-complaint.

\r\n\r\n

(b) \r\nAny other cross-complaint may be filed at any time before the court has\r\nset a date for trial.

\r\n\r\n

(c) \r\nA party shall obtain leave of court to file any cross-complaint except\r\none filed within the time specified in subdivision (a) or (b). Leave may be\r\ngranted in the interest of justice at any time during the course of the action.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

S&S’s proposed cross-complaint asserts\r\ncauses of action for (1) comparative indemnity and apportionment of fault; (2)\r\ntotal equitable indemnity; (3) contribution; (4) declaratory relief – duty to\r\ndefend; (5) declaratory relief – duty to indemnify; (6) contractual indemnity;\r\n(7) breach of contract; and (8) implied contractual indemnity. (Motion, pgs. 3-4, Exh. A.) The proposed cross-complaint arises out of\r\nthe same “transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences” as\r\nthe causes of action asserted against S&S in Fassberg’s FAXC, specifically Constructure’s\r\nwork\r\non the Project. (C.C.P. §428.10(b)(1).) In addition, S&S’s cause of action for\r\nequitable indemnity against Constructure are transactionally related to the allegations\r\nin the Fassberg’s FACC. (See Time for Living, Inc. v. Guy Hatfield\r\nHomes/All American Development Co. (1991) 230 Cal.App.3d 30, 38 (“Cross-complaints\r\nfor comparative equitable indemnity would appear virtually always\r\ntransactionally related to the main action”).) \r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

S&S is entitled\r\nto an order granting leave to file its cross-complaint. In opposition, Constructure argues the motion\r\nimproperly seeks leave to file a permissive cross-complaint where S&S’s cross-complaint\r\nis a compulsory cross-complaint. (Opposition,\r\npg. 3.) However, this argument is without merit, while Constructure is the plaintiff\r\nin the instant action, it has not asserted any claims against S&S, rather, S&S’s\r\nclaims are filed with respect to the FAXC filed by Fassberg. Here, Constructure has asserted no claims\r\nagainst S&S, and as such, the proposed cross-complaint is permissive and\r\nnot compulsory, and not subject to the time constraints argued by Constructure. (Reply, pgs. 1-3; C.C.P. §§428.50(a),\r\n428.50(b) [“[a]ny other cross-complaint may be filed at any time before the\r\ncourt has set a trial date.”].) Thus Heshejin v. Rostami (2020) 54\r\nCal.App.5th 984, 994-95, cited in opposition is inapposite. (Id., [holding § 426.30 applies to shareholders\r\nin derivative shareholder action where corporation was party to the prior\r\naction, and the proposed claims should have been asserted in the prior action].)\r\n In addition, while a trial date of November\r\n29, 2021 has been set in this action, C.C.P. §428.50(c) provides that the Court\r\nmay provide leave in the interest of justice at any time during the course of\r\nlitigation. Finally, S&S need not\r\nmake a showing of oversight, inadvertence, mistake or neglect pursuant to\r\nC.C.P. §426.50 which only applies to compulsory cross-complaints and not\r\npermissive cross-complaints.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Based on the\r\nforegoing, S&S’s motion for leave to file a cross-complaint is granted.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Dated: July _____, 2021

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Hon. Monica\r\nBachner

\r\n\r\n

Judge of the\r\nSuperior Court

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n'
related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where Peri Formwork Systems, Inc. is a litigant

Latest cases where FASSBERG CONTRACTING CORPORATION A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION is a litigant

Latest cases where WILSHIRE CORONADO DEVELOPMENT CORP. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION is a litigant

Latest cases where CONSTRUCTURE INC. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION is a litigant