NATASHA WHITE FAMILY REVOCABLE TRUST VS COLEMAN SMITH

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: ****6078    Hearing Date: September 21, 2020    Dept: 17

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

DEPARTMENT 17

TENTATIVE RULING

On August 23, 2018, Plaintiff Natasha White Family Revocable Trust, by and through the Trustor, Natasha S. White filed a first amended complaint (FAC) against Defendants Coleman Smith, Inc. dba the Service Company Escrow, Leotis Coleman in his professional and individual capacity, and Leshan Bircher in her professional and individual capacity, alleging: (1) negligence; (2) negligent hiring, supervision, and retention; (3) breach of contract; (4) negligent misrepresentation; (5) negligent infliction of emotional distress; (6) breach of fiduciary duty; (7) conversion; (8) accounting; and (9) common count.

Plaintiff has a pending stipulation for Judgment with Defendants Leotis Coleman and Ellis C. Smith.

Defendant Coleman Smith, Inc. was dismissed from the action on January 21, 2020.

Default was entered against Leshan Bircher on March 1, 2018.

Plaintiff now moves for default judgment against Leshan Bircher for $241.307.72, based on alleged damages arising from his alleged conduct as an escrow agent while participating in the sale escrow of Plaintiff’s property.

The Court has identified the following problems with the default judgment packet:

· Plaintiff’s default judgment packet submits a copy of the verified original complaint. (Ransom Decl., Exh. A.) However, a FAC was filed on August 23, 2018. As such, the original complaint is no longer operative.

· Plaintiff seeks a default judgment on all causes of action. However, Plaintiff has submitted no evidence which could support her first, second, fourth, fifth, or sixth cause of action. If Plaintiff wishes to move for a judgement on these causes of action, Plaintiff must submit evidence which speaks to each element of each cause of action.

· Even for those causes of action for which Plaintiff has submitted evidence, the Court finds Plaintiff’s packet insufficient and very difficult to follow. Plaintiff’s prove up must provide greater clarity on how the submitted evidence supports her cause of actions. For example, Plaintiff points to Exh. 1 as purporting to show she is entitled to $241,307.22. However, this document is nothing more than a list of figures and entities. There is no way to authenticate this document, and there is nothing provided which would allow the Court to substantiate any of the information stated within.

· As submitted, the Court is at a loss to see how the submitted evidence establishes that Plaintiff was owed $241,307.22, and that Plaintiff repeatedly demanded this money be paid out to no avail.

Case Number: ****6078    Hearing Date: June 22, 2020    Dept: 17

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

DEPARTMENT 17

TENTATIVE RULING

On December 12, 2017, Plaintiff Natasha White Family Revocable Trust, by and through the Trustor, Natasha S. White filed suit against Coleman Smith, the Service company Escrow, Leotis Coleman, and Leshan Bircher.

Plaintiff has entered into settlement agreements with all defendants except for Leshan Bircher.

Default was entered against Leshan Bircher (Defendant) on March 7, 2018. Plaintiff now moves to enter a default judgment against Defendant.

Factual Background

Plaintiff claims that Defendant owes $264,226 from the sales proceeds of the property that defendants were holding in escrow for Plaintiff’s benefit.

Outstanding Issues with Plaintiff’s Default Judgment packet:

• While Plaintiff has attached a copy of the residential purchase agreement and joint escrow instructions, Plaintiff has not attached any documentation that corroborates the $264,226 figure owed. A declaration from Natasha White stating this is the amount owed is insufficient, and external documentation must be provided to establish that this is the correct figure.

Plaintiff must submit documentation that corroborates Plaintiff’s contention that she is owed an additional $264,226 under the agreement, and that this amount is outstanding.

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.