This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 07/02/2019 at 00:56:15 (UTC).

EVE SHATKIN VS ALAN MARVIN WOOD; ET AL

Case Summary

On 03/02/2018 EVE SHATKIN filed a Property - Other Real Property lawsuit against ALAN MARVIN WOOD. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Torrance Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is DEIRDRE HILL. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****2712

  • Filing Date:

    03/02/2018

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Property - Other Real Property

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Torrance Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

DEIRDRE HILL

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs and Cross Defendants

SHATKIN EVE AN INDIVIDUAL

SHATKIN EVE

ALAN M. WOOD AS TRUSTEE OF THE ALAN WOOD REVOCABLE TRUST

Defendants and Cross Plaintiffs

DOES 1 THROUGH 25 INCLUSIVE

WELLS FARGO BANK N.A.

WOOD ALAN MARVIN AN INDIVIDUAL & AS...

ALL PERSONS UNKNOWN CLAIMING LEGAL OR...

ALAN MARVIN WOOD

ALAN MARVIN WOOD AS TRUSTEE OF THE ALAN

SHATKIN AN INDIVIDUAL EVE

WOOD ALAN MARVIN

SHATKIN AN INDIVIDUAL JONATHAN

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Defendant and Plaintiff Attorneys

KESHMIRI KAVEH

KAVEH KESHMIRI

SIMIS MICOLE ELLIOT

MICOLE SIMIS

SIMIS MICOLE

CHAPMAN CHRIS C.

 

Court Documents

Notice of Case Management Conference

3/2/2018: Notice of Case Management Conference

Legacy Document

3/20/2018: Legacy Document

Minute Order

6/7/2018: Minute Order

Legacy Document

6/7/2018: Legacy Document

Notice of Related Case

6/7/2018: Notice of Related Case

Legacy Document

6/27/2018: Legacy Document

Motion to Consolidate

7/2/2018: Motion to Consolidate

Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information

8/1/2018: Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information

Notice

8/3/2018: Notice

Notice of Case Reassignment and Order for Plaintiff to Give Notice

8/17/2018: Notice of Case Reassignment and Order for Plaintiff to Give Notice

Other -

9/12/2018: Other -

Request for Judicial Notice

9/18/2018: Request for Judicial Notice

Minute Order

11/28/2018: Minute Order

Notice of Case Reassignment and Order for Plaintiff to Give Notice

12/26/2018: Notice of Case Reassignment and Order for Plaintiff to Give Notice

Notice of Posting of Jury Fees

2/27/2019: Notice of Posting of Jury Fees

Declaration

3/12/2019: Declaration

Notice

3/13/2019: Notice

Minute Order

4/15/2019: Minute Order

41 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 05/22/2019
  • Declaration (of Elizabeth Silacci in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment); Filed by Alan M. Wood, as Trustee of the Alan Wood Revocable Trust (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/22/2019
  • Statement of Material Facts Not in Dispute Pursuant to C.C.P. 437 (C); Filed by Alan M. Wood, as Trustee of the Alan Wood Revocable Trust (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/22/2019
  • Motion for Summary Judgment; Filed by Alan M. Wood, as Trustee of the Alan Wood Revocable Trust (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/15/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department B, Deirdre Hill, Presiding; Hearing on Ex Parte Application ( for an Order Striking Defendant Wood's Motion for Summary Judgment) - Held - Motion Denied

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/15/2019
  • Minute Order ( (Hearing on Ex Parte Application for an Order Striking Defend...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/12/2019
  • Declaration in Support of Ex Parte Application; Filed by EVE, SHATKIN (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/12/2019
  • Request for Judicial Notice; Filed by EVE, SHATKIN (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/12/2019
  • Ex Parte Application (Ex Parte Application Striking Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment and Order for Sanctions $3150); Filed by EVE, SHATKIN (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/04/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department B, Deirdre Hill, Presiding; Hearing on Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens - Not Held - Taken Off Calendar by Party

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/03/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department B, Deirdre Hill, Presiding; Hearing on Demurrer - without Motion to Strike - Not Held - Advanced and Vacated

    Read MoreRead Less
67 More Docket Entries
  • 05/01/2018
  • Complaint; Filed by Alan M. Wood, as Trustee of the Alan Wood Revocable Trust (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/16/2018
  • Answer; Filed by ALAN MARVIN WOOD (Defendant); ALAN MARVIN WOOD AS TRUSTEE OF THE ALAN (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/20/2018
  • Proof-Service/Summons; Filed by EVE, SHATKIN (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/20/2018
  • Proof-Service/Summons; Filed by EVE, SHATKIN (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/06/2018
  • Notice-Pending Action; Filed by EVE, SHATKIN (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/05/2018
  • Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court); Filed by null

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/02/2018
  • Summons; Filed by EVE, SHATKIN (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/02/2018
  • Complaint; Filed by EVE, SHATKIN (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/02/2018
  • Notice of Case Management Conference; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/27/2017
  • Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint); Filed by EVE, SHATKIN (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: YC072712    Hearing Date: October 24, 2019    Dept: SWB

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Southwest District

Torrance Dept. B

EVE SHATKIN,

Plaintiff,

Case No.:

YC072712

c/w 18IWUD02020

vs.

[Tentative] RULING

ALAN MARVIN WOOD, et al.,

Defendants.

Hearing Date: October 24, 2019

Moving Parties: Alan Marvin Wood as trustee, as plaintiff in the UD action

Responding Party: Defendants Eve and Jonathan Shatkin

Motion for Summary Judgment or, in the alternative, Summary Adjudication

The court considered the moving, opposition, and reply papers.

RULING

The motion for summary judgment is DENIED. The motion for summary adjudication is DENIED.

BACKGROUND

YC072712

On March 2, 2018, plaintiff Eve Shatkin filed a complaint against Alan Marvin Wood, ind. and as trustee of The Alan Wood Revocable Trust, and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

On August 15, 2018, plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint for (1) quiet title and adverse possession, (2) partition of real property by sale, (3) accounting, (4) violation of Civil Code §2223, (5) violation of Civil Code §2224, (6) negligence, (7) breach of fiduciary duty, and (8) promissory estoppel.

On November 28, 2018, the court sustained with leave to amend defendant Wells Fargo’s demurrer to the complaint as to the 6th and 7th causes of action. Plaintiff did not file a Second Amended Complaint.

On January 7, 2019, Wood filed a cross-complaint for ejectment and claim for damages.

18IWUD02020

On May 1, 2018, plaintiff Alan M. Wood, as trustee of the Alan Wood Revocable Trust, filed a UD complaint against Eve and Jonathan Shatkin based on a 3-day notice to pay rent or quit.

On July 2, 2018, the cases were deemed related and consolidated.

LEGAL AUTHORITY

The purpose of a motion for summary judgment or summary adjudication “is to provide courts with a mechanism to cut through the parties’ pleadings in order to determine whether, despite their allegations, trial is in fact necessary to resolve their dispute.” Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal. 4th 826, 843. “Code of Civil Procedure section 437c, subdivision (c), requires the trial judge to grant summary judgment if all the evidence submitted, and ‘all inferences reasonably deducible from the evidence’ and uncontradicted by other inferences or evidence, show that there is no triable issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Adler v. Manor Healthcare Corp. (1992) 7 Cal. App. 4th 1110, 1119.

“On a motion for summary judgment, the initial burden is always on the moving party to make a prima facie showing that there are no triable issues of material fact.” Scalf v. D. B. Log Homes, Inc. (2005) 128 Cal. App. 4th 1510, 1519.

“When deciding whether to grant summary judgment, the court must consider all of the evidence set forth in the papers (except evidence to which the court has sustained an objection), as well as all reasonable inferences that may be drawn from that evidence, in the light most favorable to the party opposing summary judgment.” Avivi, 159 Cal. App. 4th at 467; CCP §437c(c).

Discussion

Plaintiff Alan Marvin Wood, as trustee of The Alan Wood Revocable Trust, requests that the court enter summary judgment in his favor and against defendants Eve and Jonathan Shatkin pursuant to CCP § 437c on the ground that there is no triable issue of material fact and Wood is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. In the alternative, Wood requests summary adjudication of “all affirmative defenses” specified in “defendants’ answers.”

“A party may move for summary judgment in an action or proceeding if it is contended that the action has no merit or that there is no defense to the action or proceeding.” CCP §437c. Although the notice does not state, it appears that plaintiff is seeking summary judgment on his UD complaint, and not as to the entire consolidated action, which involves the quiet title FAC and cross-complaint. Plaintiff Wood’s separate statement only addresses the elements of a UD complaint. A ruling as to the UD complaint only is improper because it would not dispose of the entire action and would not resolve the causes of action in the FAC.

The court notes that plaintiff asserts in the memorandum of points and authorities that defendant Shatkin’s claims for constructive trust in the quiet title action are barred by the statute of frauds and statute of limitations. The separate statement, however, does not set forth the FAC’s causes of action for constructive trust or set forth “plainly and concisely all material facts that the moving party contends are undisputed,” as required by CCP §437c(b)(1). Moreover, the notice does not seek adjudication of the FAC’s constructive trust causes of action.

In any event, plaintiff Wood has not met his burden as to the UD complaint.

Under CCP §1161, the elements of unlawful detainer are “[a] tenant of real property, for a term less than life, or the executor or administrator of his or her estate heretofore qualified and now acting or hereafter to be qualified and act, is guilty of unlawful detainer: . . . . 2. When he or she continues in possession, in person or by subtenant, without the permission of his or her landlord, or the successor in estate of his or her landlord, if applicable, after default in the payment of rent, pursuant to the lease or agreement under which the property is held, and three days’ notice, in writing, requiring its payment . . . .”

In the UD complaint, plaintiff is named as “Alan Marvin Wood as trustee of The Alan Wood Revocable Trust” and alleges that on April 1, 2017, defendants agreed to rent the premises as a month-to-month tenancy of $550/month, based on an oral agreement made with plaintiff.

Plaintiff presents no evidence that plaintiff Wood in his capacity “as trustee” made an oral agreement with defendants or that an agreement was made on April 1, 2017. Rather, according to plaintiff, the property was transferred in January 2018 to an irrevocable trust. Elizabeth Silacci decl., Exh. 7. Further, plaintiff presents no evidence of a lease or agreement under which the property is held.

The motion for summary judgment is therefore DENIED.

Alternatively, plaintiff seeks summary adjudication of “all affirmative defenses.” Plaintiff fails to include a separate statement identifying any of defendant’s affirmative defenses, as required by CCP §437c(b)(1). Further, the notice is defective because “[w]here summary adjudication is sought, the notice must specify the ‘specific cause of action, affirmative defense, claims for damages, or issues of duty’ sought to be adjudicated.” Weil & Brown, Civ. Proc. Before Trial, 10:86 (citing to Cal. Rules of Court Rule 3.1350(b)). The notice fails to identify the defenses to which the motion is directed.

The motion for summary adjudication is DENIED.

Plaintiff is ordered to give notice of the ruling.