OK JOO KIM VS. CHONG KUN PAK, ET AL.
Case Summary
On 09/21/2017 OK JOO KIM filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against CHONG KUN PAK. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Compton Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are BRIAN S. CURREY and MAURICE A. LEITER. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.
Case Details
-
Case Number:
****8916
-
Filing Date:
09/21/2017
-
Case Status:
Pending - Other Pending
-
Court:
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
-
Courthouse:
Compton Courthouse
-
County, State:
Los Angeles, California
Judge Details
Presiding Judges
BRIAN S. CURREY
MAURICE A. LEITER
Party Details
Plaintiff
KIM OK JOO
Defendants
T-RAGE CORP.
PAK CHONG KUN
Not Classified By Court
CHONG KUN PAK T-RAGE CORP.
Attorney/Law Firm Details
Defendant Attorneys
MARH DAVID
MARH DAVID T
Court Documents
9/21/2017: Notice of Case Management Conference
9/21/2017: Summons
9/21/2017: Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court)
9/21/2017: Complaint
12/19/2017: Answer
12/19/2017: Notice of Ruling
4/9/2018: Notice of Case Reassignment and Order for Plaintiff to Give Notice
4/9/2018: Notice of Case Reassignment and Order for Plaintiff to Give Notice
11/8/2018: Request for Judicial Notice
11/8/2018: Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses
12/20/2018: Other -
1/30/2019: Minute Order
2/8/2019: Declaration
2/13/2019: Response
2/13/2019: Response
4/22/2019: Trial Brief
6/7/2019: Notice
6/7/2019: Proof of Service by Mail
Docket Entries
- 06/07/2019
-
Proof of Service by Mail; Filed by CHONG KUN PAK (Defendant); T-RAGE CORP. (Defendant)
- 06/07/2019
-
Notice (Of Hearing On Order To Show Cause Re: Dismissal Of Action); Filed by CHONG KUN PAK (Defendant); T-RAGE CORP. (Defendant)
- 06/03/2019
-
at 08:30 AM in Department A, Maurice A. Leiter, Presiding; Case Management Conference - Held - Continued
- 06/03/2019
-
at 08:30 AM in Department A, Maurice A. Leiter, Presiding; Trial Readiness Conference - Held - Continued
- 06/03/2019
-
at 08:30 AM in Department A, Maurice A. Leiter, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: (Dismissal for Failure to Prosecute) - Held - Continued
- 06/03/2019
-
Minute Order ( (Case Management Conference; Trial Readiness Conference; Order...)); Filed by Clerk
- 04/29/2019
-
at 09:30 AM in Department A, Maurice A. Leiter, Presiding; Non-Jury Trial - Not Held - Advanced and Vacated
- 04/22/2019
-
at 09:30 AM in Department A, Maurice A. Leiter, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Held
- 04/22/2019
-
Minute Order ( (Final Status Conference)); Filed by Clerk
- 04/22/2019
-
Trial Brief; Filed by OK JOO KIM (Plaintiff)
- 12/12/2017
-
at 09:00 AM in Department A; Hearing on Demurrer - without Motion to Strike - Held - Continued
- 12/12/2017
-
at 09:00 AM in Department A; Hearing on Demurrer - without Motion to Strike
- 12/12/2017
-
Minute order entered: 2017-12-12 00:00:00; Filed by Clerk
- 11/02/2017
-
Demurrer; Filed by CHONG KUN PAK (Defendant); T-RAGE CORP. (Defendant)
- 09/21/2017
-
Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court); Filed by OK JOO KIM (Plaintiff)
- 09/21/2017
-
Request to Waive Court Fees; Filed by OK JOO KIM (Plaintiff)
- 09/21/2017
-
Notice of Case Management Conference; Filed by Clerk
- 09/21/2017
-
Summons; Filed by null
- 09/21/2017
-
Complaint; Filed by OK JOO KIM (Plaintiff)
- 09/21/2017
-
Civil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by OK JOO KIM (Plaintiff)
Tentative Rulings
Case Number: TC028916 Hearing Date: December 19, 2019 Dept: A
# 8. Ok Joo Kim v. Chong Kun Pak, et al.
Case No.: TC028916
Matter on calendar for: Motion to be Relieved as Counsel
Tentative ruling:
Background
This action is based on fraud. Plaintiff Ok Joo Kim, in pro per, alleges that defendants Chong Kun Pak and T-Rage Corp. provided her with checks that were either returned for insufficient funds or otherwise not honored by the bank. Kim seeks $134,000 in damages.
Defense counsel David Marh now moves to be relieved as counsel for Defendants Chong Kun Pakand T-Rage Corp.. The motions are unopposed.
For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants the motions.
Standard
Code of Civil Procedure § 284(2) provides that “[an] attorney in an action or special proceeding may be changed at any time before or after judgment or final determination…upon the order of the court, upon the application of either client or attorney, after notice from one to the other.” Additionally, attorneys seeking to be relieved as counsel must comply with California Rule of Professional Conduct 1.16 in seeking to be relieved.
A motion to be relieved as counsel must comport with California Rules of Court Rule 3.1362. The Rule requires the notice of motion and motion to be on the Judicial Council of California form MC-051, and the accompanying declaration to be on form MC-052. The proposed order must be form MC-053.
Analysis
Counsel has provided the necessary forms (MC-051 and MC-052) and served the motion on the clients. The declaration cites to a failure of Defendants to pay counsel’s required fees. Trial in this matter is set for January 31, 2020. Accordingly, the motion to be relieved is granted.
Ruling
The motion to be relieved as counsel is granted. Withdrawal is effective upon counsel’s service of the signed order upon his clients.
Next dates:
Notice:
Case Number: TC028916 Hearing Date: December 05, 2019 Dept: A
# 11. Ok Joo Kim v. Chong Kun Pak, et al.
Case No.: TC028916
Matter on calendar for: Motion to be Relieved as Counsel
Tentative ruling:
Background
This action is based on fraud. Plaintiff Ok Joo Kim, in pro per, alleges that defendants Chong Kun Pak and T-Rage Corp. provided her with checks that were either returned for insufficient funds or otherwise not honored by the bank. Kim seeks $134,000 in damages.
Defense counsel David Marh now moves to be relieved as counsel for Defendant Chong Kun Pak. The motion is unopposed.
For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants the motion.
Standard
Code of Civil Procedure § 284(2) provides that “[an] attorney in an action or special proceeding may be changed at any time before or after judgment or final determination…upon the order of the court, upon the application of either client or attorney, after notice from one to the other.” Additionally, attorneys seeking to be relieved as counsel must comply with California Rule of Professional Conduct 1.16 in seeking to be relieved.
A motion to be relieved as counsel must comport with California Rules of Court Rule 3.1362. The Rule requires the notice of motion and motion to be on the Judicial Council of California form MC-051, and the accompanying declaration to be on form MC-052. The proposed order must be form MC-053.
Analysis
Counsel has provided the necessary forms (MC-051 and MC-052) and served the motion on the client. The declaration cites to a failure of Defendant to pay counsel’s required fees. Trial in this matter is set for January 31, 2020. Accordingly, the motion to be relieved is granted.
Ruling
The motion to be relieved as counsel is granted. Counsel to provide the proposed order (MC-053) form.
Next dates:
Notice:
Dig Deeper
Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases