This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 06/14/2019 at 08:13:30 (UTC).

HONG SOO JUN VS. JUAN J BERGANZA

Case Summary

On 01/20/2017 HONG SOO JUN filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against JUAN J BERGANZA. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Chatsworth Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is MELVIN D. SANDVIG. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.
Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****7530

  • Filing Date:

    01/20/2017

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Other Contract

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

MELVIN D. SANDVIG

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs

JUN HONG SOO AN INDIVIDUAL

JUN HONG

Defendants

BERGANZA JUAN J AN INDIVIDUAL

BERGANZA JUAN

SETH M. FRIEDMAN ESQ.

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

LAW OFFICES OF SARAH JUN APLC

 

Court Documents

Unknown

1/20/2017: Unknown

Civil Case Cover Sheet

1/20/2017: Civil Case Cover Sheet

Summons

1/20/2017: Summons

Unknown

1/20/2017: Unknown

Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

2/22/2017: Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

Unknown

2/22/2017: Unknown

Answer

2/22/2017: Answer

Case Management Statement

6/5/2017: Case Management Statement

Minute Order

6/19/2017: Minute Order

Case Management Statement

6/19/2017: Case Management Statement

Unknown

11/16/2017: Unknown

Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

11/16/2017: Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

Motion for Summary Judgment

11/16/2017: Motion for Summary Judgment

Unknown

11/16/2017: Unknown

Unknown

11/16/2017: Unknown

Minute Order

12/12/2017: Minute Order

Unknown

1/30/2018: Unknown

Minute Order

2/7/2018: Minute Order

17 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 05/30/2019
  • DocketNotice (of Termination or Modification of Stay); Filed by HONG JUN (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 03/29/2019
  • Docketat 08:32 AM in Department F47, Melvin D. Sandvig, Presiding; Hearing on Motion for Summary Judgment - Not Held - Rescheduled by Party

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 03/29/2019
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department F47, Melvin D. Sandvig, Presiding; Trial Setting Conference - Not Held - Rescheduled by Party

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 03/15/2019
  • DocketRequest (for Off Calendar of March 29, 2019 Trial Settling Conference Or Alternatively Continuance Thereof); Filed by HONG JUN (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 03/07/2019
  • DocketNotice (of Continuance of Hearing Date Re: Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment); Filed by HONG JUN (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/31/2018
  • Docketat 08:32 AM in Department F47, Melvin D. Sandvig, Presiding; Hearing on Motion for Summary Judgment - Not Held - Rescheduled by Party

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/31/2018
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department F47, Melvin D. Sandvig, Presiding; Trial Setting Conference - Not Held - Continued - Party's Motion

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/17/2018
  • DocketRequest (FOR OFF CALENDAR OF 10/31/18 TRIAL SETTING CONFERENCE)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/16/2018
  • DocketNotice (OF HEARING DATE RE: PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT); Filed by HONG JUN (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 06/01/2018
  • DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by HONG JUN (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
17 More Docket Entries
  • 06/19/2017
  • DocketCase Management Statement; Filed by JUAN BERGANZA (Defendant); ESQ. SETH M. FRIEDMAN (Legacy Party)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 06/19/2017
  • DocketMinute order entered: 2017-06-19 00:00:00; Filed by Clerk

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 06/05/2017
  • DocketCase Management Statement; Filed by HONG JUN (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 02/22/2017
  • DocketAnswer; Filed by JUAN BERGANZA (Defendant); ESQ. SETH M. FRIEDMAN (Legacy Party)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 02/22/2017
  • DocketProof of Service (not Summons and Complaint); Filed by HONG JUN (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 02/22/2017
  • DocketDeclaration; Filed by HONG JUN (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 01/20/2017
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by HONG JUN (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 01/20/2017
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Unlimited Civil Case (and Notice of Case Management Conference); Filed by Clerk

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 01/20/2017
  • DocketSummons; Filed by null

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 01/20/2017
  • DocketComplaint filed-Summons Issued; Filed by null

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: ****7530    Hearing Date: June 2, 2021    Dept: F47

Dept. F-47

Date: 6/2/21

Case #****7530

MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES

Motion filed on 12/23/20.

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff Hong Soo Jun

RESPONDING PARTY: Defendant Juan J. Berganza

NOTICE: ok

RELIEF REQUESTED: An order awarding Plaintiff $40,256.00 in attorneys’ fees.

RULING: The unopposed motion is granted.

This action arises out of Defendant Juan J. Berganza’s breach of a Purchase & Sale Agreement signed by Berganza and Plaintiff Hong Soo Jun on 3/5/12. Pursuant to the agreement, Defendant agreed to pay Plaintiff $60,000.00 for 2 trucks, 2 trailers and 2 reefers (the equipment) and Plaintiff allowed Defendant to take/keep possession of the equipment. The purchase price was to be paid by 30 monthly installments of $2,000.00 beginning on 4/1/12 and ending on 9/1/14. Defendant stopped paying and has not made a payment since 9/1/12. Plaintiff filed this action on 1/20/17. On 9/1/20, this Court heard and granted Plaintiff’s unopposed motion for summary judgment. On 10/29/20, this Court signed the Judgment pursuant to the ruling granting Plaintiff’s summary judgment. On 12/22/20, Plaintiff served the instant motion for attorneys’ fees and filed the motion on 12/23/20.

The agreement between the parties contained an attorneys’ fee provision. (Jun Decl., Ex.A ¶16). Plaintiff’s attorney expended 118.4 hours in prosecuting this action and charges $340.00 per hour. (Jun Decl. ¶5, Ex.D).

As the prevailing party in this action based on a contract which contains an attorneys’ fee provision, Plaintiff is entitled to recover reasonable attorneys’ fees. See CC 1717; (Jun Decl., Ex.A). The lodestar method of calculation (reasonable number of hours spent multiplied by a reasonable hourly rate) is to determine whether the amount of attorneys’ fees requested is reasonable. See PLCM Group, Inc. (2000) 22 C4th 1084, 1095-1096; Ketchum (2001) 24 C4th 1122.

The Court finds that the 118.4 hours expended by Plaintiff’s attorney and the hourly rate charged of $340 to be reasonable. As such, Plaintiff is awarded attorneys’ fees in the amount of $40,256.00.



Case Number: ****7530    Hearing Date: September 01, 2020    Dept: F47

Dept. F-47

Date: 9/1/20

Case #****7530

SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Motion filed on 11/16/17.

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff Hong Soo Jun

RESPONDING PARTY: Defendant Juan J. Berganza

NOTICE: ok

RELIEF REQUESTED: An order granting summary judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant.*

*On 8/24/20, Plaintiff filed a Request for Dismissal without prejudice of the 2nd cause of action for Money Lent which was entered the same day.

RULING: The unopposed motion is granted. 

This action arises out of Defendant Juan J. Berganza’s breach of a Purchase & Sale Agreement signed by Berganza and Plaintiff Hong Soo Jun on 3/5/12.  (Separate Statement of Undisputed Facts (SSUF) 1).  Pursuant to the agreement, Defendant agreed to pay Plaintiff $60,000.00 for 2 trucks, 2 trailers and 2 reefers (the equipment) and Plaintiff allowed Defendant to take/keep possession of the equipment.  (SSUF 2, 3).  The purchase price was to be paid by 30 monthly installments of $2,000.00 beginning on 4/1/12 and ending on 9/1/14.  (SSUF 4).  Defendant stopped paying and has not made a payment since 9/1/12.  (SSUF 5).  Plaintiff filed this action on 1/20/17. 

Since a breach of written contract claim is governed by a 4 year statute of limitations, Plaintiff only seeks to recover payments due within 4 years of the filing of the action (i.e., payments due from 2/1/13 through 9/1/14 which total $40,000.00.  (SSUF 6); CCP 337(a).  Additionally, pursuant to the terms of the agreement, Defendant agreed to pay 10% of any and all unpaid monthly payment, if the monthly payment is not made within 10 days of the due date.  (SSUF 7).  Therefore, $28,833.33, 10% per year of all unpaid monthly payments commencing 2/1/13 until 11/1/17, should be added to the damages of $40,000.00.  (SSUF 8).  The agreement also provides that the prevailing party is entitled to recover attorneys’ fees.  (SSUF 9).

Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff has established the elements of the breach of contract claim: (1) the existence of a contract between the parties; (2) Plaintiff’s performance under the contract; (3) Defendant’s breach; and (4) damages suffered by Plaintiff as a result.  See Richman (2014) 224 CA4th 1182, 1186; Acoustic, Inc. (1971) 14 CA3d 887, 913.  Defendant has failed to offer any evidence in opposition to the motion.  As such, Defendant has not shown that a triable issue of material fact exists as to the cause of action or a defense thereto and Plaintiff is entitled to judgment in Plaintiff’s favor in the amount of $68,833.33.  CCP 437c(p)(1).

Plaintiff may make a motion to recover Plaintiff’s reasonable attorneys’ fees pursuant to the agreement.