This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 06/13/2019 at 07:37:36 (UTC).

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 Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****8916

  • Filing Date:

    09/21/2017

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Other Contract

  • 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

Notice of Case Management Conference

9/21/2017: Notice of Case Management Conference

Summons

9/21/2017: Summons

Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court)

9/21/2017: Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court)

Complaint

9/21/2017: Complaint

Answer

12/19/2017: Answer

Notice of Ruling

12/19/2017: Notice of Ruling

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

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

Request for Judicial Notice

11/8/2018: Request for Judicial Notice

Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses

11/8/2018: Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses

Other -

12/20/2018: Other -

Minute Order

1/30/2019: Minute Order

Declaration

2/8/2019: Declaration

Response

2/13/2019: Response

Response

2/13/2019: Response

Trial Brief

4/22/2019: Trial Brief

Notice

6/7/2019: Notice

Proof of Service by Mail

6/7/2019: Proof of Service by Mail

37 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 06/07/2019
  • Proof of Service by Mail; Filed by CHONG KUN PAK (Defendant); T-RAGE CORP. (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 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)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/03/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department A, Maurice A. Leiter, Presiding; Case Management Conference - Held - Continued

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/03/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department A, Maurice A. Leiter, Presiding; Trial Readiness Conference - Held - Continued

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 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

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/03/2019
  • Minute Order ( (Case Management Conference; Trial Readiness Conference; Order...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/29/2019
  • at 09:30 AM in Department A, Maurice A. Leiter, Presiding; Non-Jury Trial - Not Held - Advanced and Vacated

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/22/2019
  • at 09:30 AM in Department A, Maurice A. Leiter, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/22/2019
  • Minute Order ( (Final Status Conference)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/22/2019
  • Trial Brief; Filed by OK JOO KIM (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
51 More Docket Entries
  • 12/12/2017
  • at 09:00 AM in Department A; Hearing on Demurrer - without Motion to Strike - Held - Continued

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/12/2017
  • at 09:00 AM in Department A; Hearing on Demurrer - without Motion to Strike

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/12/2017
  • Minute order entered: 2017-12-12 00:00:00; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/02/2017
  • Demurrer; Filed by CHONG KUN PAK (Defendant); T-RAGE CORP. (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/21/2017
  • Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court); Filed by OK JOO KIM (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/21/2017
  • Request to Waive Court Fees; Filed by OK JOO KIM (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/21/2017
  • Notice of Case Management Conference; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/21/2017
  • Summons; Filed by null

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/21/2017
  • Complaint; Filed by OK JOO KIM (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/21/2017
  • Civil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by OK JOO KIM (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less

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:

  1. 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.

  2. 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.

  1. 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.

  2. 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:

  1. 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.

  2. 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.

  1. 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.

  2. Ruling

    The motion to be relieved as counsel is granted. Counsel to provide the proposed order (MC-053) form.

    Next dates:

    Notice: