This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 11/01/2021 at 03:52:06 (UTC).

EXCEL ADJUSTERS INC, ET AL. VS YOUNG S KIM, ET AL.

Case Summary

On 09/30/2019 EXCEL ADJUSTERS INC filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against YOUNG S KIM. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are RICHARD E. RICO and JON R. TAKASUGI. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******4929

  • Filing Date:

    09/30/2019

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Other Contract

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judges

RICHARD E. RICO

JON R. TAKASUGI

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs

EXCEL ADJUSTERS INC.

RESTORATION UNLIMITED GROUP INC.

Defendants

KIM YOUNG S

CALIBER HOME LOANS INC

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

WHITE STEVE

Defendant Attorneys

EDOZIEM OFUNNE

EDOZIEM OFUNNE NKECHI

Court Documents

Court documents are not available for this case.

 

Docket Entries

  • 11/10/2021
  • Hearing11/10/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department 17 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Order to Show Cause Re: Entry of Default and Default Judgment

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/22/2021
  • DocketNotice of Rejection Default/Clerk's Judgment; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/16/2021
  • DocketRequest for Entry of Default / Judgment; Filed by Excel Adjusters Inc., (Plaintiff); Restoration Unlimited Group Inc., (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/10/2021
  • DocketNotice of Rejection - Pleadings; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/31/2021
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 17, Jon R. Takasugi, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (Settlement) - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/31/2021
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 17, Jon R. Takasugi, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (for Failure to Prosecute) - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/31/2021
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (Settlement); Order to Show...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/31/2021
  • DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by Excel Adjusters Inc., (Plaintiff); Restoration Unlimited Group Inc., (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/30/2021
  • DocketCase Management Statement; Filed by Excel Adjusters Inc., (Plaintiff); Restoration Unlimited Group Inc., (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/27/2021
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 17, Jon R. Takasugi, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (for Failure to Prosecute) - Not Held - Rescheduled by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/27/2021
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 17, Jon R. Takasugi, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (Settlement) - Not Held - Rescheduled by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/18/2021
  • DocketNotice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/12/2021
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 17, Jon R. Takasugi, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (for Failure to Appear) - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/12/2021
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 17, Jon R. Takasugi, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (for Failure to Prosecute) - Held - Continued

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/12/2021
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 17, Jon R. Takasugi, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (Settlement) - Held - Continued

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/12/2021
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (Settlement); Order to Show...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/27/2021
  • DocketNotice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information; Filed by Caliber Home Loans Inc (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/27/2021
  • DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by Caliber Home Loans Inc (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/22/2021
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 17, Jon R. Takasugi, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (Settlement) - Held - Continued

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/22/2021
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (Settlement))); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
41 More Docket Entries

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: 19STCV34929    Hearing Date: July 20, 2020    Dept: 17

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

DEPARTMENT 17

TENATIVE RULING

EXCEL ADJUSTERS INC, et al.

YOUNG S. KIM, et al.

Legal Standard

A demurrer for sufficiency tests whether the complaint states a cause of action.¿ ¿When considering demurrers, courts read the allegations liberally and in context.¿ ¿(2006) 144 Cal.App.4th 1216, 1228.)¿ In a demurrer proceeding, the defects must be apparent on the face of the pleading or via proper judicial notice.¿ ¿ “A demurrer tests the pleadings alone and not the evidence or other extrinsic matters.¿ Therefore, it lies only where the defects appear on the face of the pleading or are judicially noticed.”¿ ¿ “The only issue involved in a demurrer hearing is whether the complaint, as it stands, unconnected with extraneous matters, states a cause of action.”¿

Factual Background

Discussion

To state a claim for conversion, a plaintiff must establish (1) his or her ownership or right to possession of the property; (2) the defendant’s conversion by a wrongful act or disposition of property rights; and (3) damages. (Welco Electronics, Inc. v. Mora (2014) 223 Cal.App.4th 202, 208.) Although cash ordinarily cannot be the subject of a cause of action for conversion, when the money at issue is a specific identifiable sum held for the benefit of another that has been misappropriated, a conversion claim can be made. (PCO, Inc. v. Christensen, Miller, Fink, Jacobs, Glaser, Weil & Shapiro, LLP (2007) 150 Cal.App.4th 384, 395 (PCO, Inc.).)

· Kim and Excel entered in a contract wherein Excel “shall be entitled to a fee of fifteen percent (15%) of the settlement amount obtained from QBE Insurance Company, in addition to reimbursement for any third party expenses. (Complaint ¶ 8.)

· At the time Caliber came into two checks—one totaling $192,815.26 and one totaling $21,357.53—Excel had an immediate possessory interest in a portion of those funds totaling $32,525.93 (or some amount less than $65,000). (Complaint ¶ 32.)

· Without releasing any portion of funds to Caliber, Excel released the funds reflect in both checks to Defendant Kim. (Complaint ¶ 33.)

· Excel is legally entitled to those funds. (Complaint ¶ 34.)

In its demurrer, Caliber argues that: (1) the Deed of Trust executed between it and Kim provided, “Fees for public adjusters, or other third parties, retained by Borrower shall not be paid out of the insurance proceeds and shall be the sole obligation of Borrower.” Therefore, Caliber properly relayed insurance payments to Kim under the contract; and (2) Excel’s allegations do not show that Caliber was entrusted with funds specifically to be held for Excel which it then misappropriated, as required to state a claim for conversion.  

The Court agrees. In SP Investment I LLC v. Cattell, the court of appeals found that conversion had been sufficiently pled when a defendant refused to turn over monetary distributions to plaintiff that he had been holding in trust for plaintiff’s benefit pursuant to a partnership agreement. (SP Investment Fund I LLC v. Cattell, supra, 18 Cal.App.5th 898, 907.) Defendant’s conduct amounted to conversion because he, while acting as an agent for plaintiff, accepted a sum of money intended to be paid to plaintiff, yet failed to make the payment. (Ibid.) Here, Excel does not allege that it had any agreement with Caliber, by which it was entitled to a certain payout and Caliber has refused to pay pursuant to that agreement. Moreover, Excel does not allege that it entrusted these funds to Caliber, and that Caliber then misappropriated those funds by failing to pay out those funds to Excel. Rather, Excel alleges that it is owed a portion of the insurance proceeds pursuant to an agreement between itself and Defendant Kim, and that Defendant Kim has failed to pay the portion of insurance proceeds owed under that contract. As a result, Plaintiff’s allegations concern an alleged breach of contract, rather than a conversion of Plaintiff’s property. (PCO, Inc., supra, 150 Cal.App.4th at p. 395.)

Based on the foregoing, Defendant’s demurrer to the fourth cause of action is sustained, with leave to amend.

It is so ordered.

Dated: , 2020

 

 

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court at smcdept17@lacourt.org by 4 p.m. the day prior as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  If a party submits on the tentative, the party’s email must include the case number and must identify the party submitting on the tentative.  If all parties to a motion submit, the court will adopt this tentative as the final order.  If the department does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be placed off calendar

Due to Covid-19, the court is strongly discouraging in-person appearances.  Parties, counsel, and court reporters present are subject to temperature checks and health inquiries, and will be denied entry if admission could create a public health risk.  The court encourages the parties wishing to argue to appear via CourtCall.  For more information, please contact the court clerk at (213) 633-0517.  Your understanding during these difficult times is appreciated.

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where RESTORATION UNLIMITED GROUP INC is a litigant

Latest cases where Caliber Home Loans, Inc. is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer EDOZIEM, OFUNNE N