This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 01/21/2023 at 19:16:04 (UTC).

SMART BEARS, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY VS SKYVIEW HOMES, INC., A CALIFORNIA NONPROFIT CORPORATION, ET AL.

Case Summary

On 03/15/2022 SMART BEARS, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against SKYVIEW HOMES, INC , A CALIFORNIA NONPROFIT CORPORATION,. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Chatsworth Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is STEPHEN P. PFAHLER. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.
Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******0170

  • Filing Date:

    03/15/2022

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Other Contract

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

STEPHEN P. PFAHLER

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

SMART BEARS LLC A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY

Defendants, Cross Plaintiffs and Cross Defendants

DRONFIELD INVESTORS LLC A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY

NEMANY STEVE

SKYVIEW HOMES INC. A CALIFORNIA NONPROFIT CORPORATION

Cross Plaintiffs, Defendants and Cross Defendants

NEMANY STEVE

SKYVIEW HOMES INC. A CALIFORNIA NONPROFIT CORPORATION

CHAVEZ AN INDIVIDUAL JULIO CESAR

JC ROOTER INC. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION

1 THROUGH 50 DOES

CITY WIDE APARTMENT MANAGEMENT INC. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION

HUNTER JOHN

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

PEARSON KIRK C

Defendant Attorneys

CARUSO JASON MOBERLY

AYOTTE NORMAND ALLISON

Cross Plaintiff Attorney

PACHECO A. ROMAN

Cross Defendant Attorney

MOSS ROBERT M

 

Court Documents

Answer

1/13/2023: Answer

Cross-Complaint

12/27/2022: Cross-Complaint

Summons - SUMMONS ON CROSS COMPLAINT

12/27/2022: Summons - SUMMONS ON CROSS COMPLAINT

Answer

12/23/2022: Answer

Stipulation and Order - STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANT AND CROSS-DEFENDANT STEVE NEMANY TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT AND CROSSCOMPLAINANT SKYVIEW HOMES INC.'S FIRST AMENDED CROSSCOMPLAI

12/1/2022: Stipulation and Order - STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANT AND CROSS-DEFENDANT STEVE NEMANY TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT AND CROSSCOMPLAINANT SKYVIEW HOMES INC.'S FIRST AMENDED CROSSCOMPLAI

Notice of Continuance

12/1/2022: Notice of Continuance

Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

11/18/2022: Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

11/18/2022: Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

Cross-Complaint

10/28/2022: Cross-Complaint

Answer - ANSWER TO SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

10/28/2022: Answer - ANSWER TO SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

Substitution of Attorney

10/24/2022: Substitution of Attorney

Substitution of Attorney

10/17/2022: Substitution of Attorney

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE)

9/15/2022: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE)

Notice of Continuance

9/16/2022: Notice of Continuance

Unknown - AMENDED CROSS-COMPLAINT (1ST)

9/27/2022: Unknown - AMENDED CROSS-COMPLAINT (1ST)

Notice and Acknowledgment of Receipt

9/28/2022: Notice and Acknowledgment of Receipt

Notice and Acknowledgment of Receipt

9/28/2022: Notice and Acknowledgment of Receipt

Answer

10/3/2022: Answer

41 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 03/01/2023
  • Hearing03/01/2023 at 08:30 AM in Department F49 at 9425 Penfield Ave., Chatsworth, CA 91311; Order to Show Cause Re: Default as to both Plaintiff/Cross-Complainant

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 03/01/2023
  • Hearing03/01/2023 at 08:30 AM in Department F49 at 9425 Penfield Ave., Chatsworth, CA 91311; Case Management Conference

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 01/13/2023
  • DocketAnswer; Filed by: Skyview Homes, Inc., a California nonprofit corporation (Cross-Defendant); As to: Steve Nemany (Cross-Complainant)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 12/27/2022
  • DocketCross-Complaint; Filed by: Steve Nemany (Defendant); As to: Skyview Homes, Inc., a California nonprofit corporation (Defendant); City Wide Apartment Management, Inc., a California, corporation (Cross-Defendant); John Hunter (Cross-Defendant)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 12/27/2022
  • DocketSummons on Cross Complaint; Issued and Filed by: Steve Nemany (Defendant)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 12/23/2022
  • DocketAnswer; Filed by: STEVE NEMANY (Cross-Defendant); As to: Skyview Homes, Inc., a California nonprofit corporation (Cross-Complainant)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 12/01/2022
  • DocketNotice of Continuance; Filed by: Smart Bears, LLC, a California limited liability company (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 12/01/2022
  • DocketStipulation and Order TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANT AND CROSS-DEFENDANT STEVE NEMANY TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT AND CROSSCOMPLAINANT SKYVIEW HOMES INC.'S FIRST AMENDED CROSSCOMPLAINT; [PROPOSED] ORDER; Signed and Filed by: STEVE NEMANY (Cross-Defendant); As to: Skyview Homes, Inc., a California nonprofit corporation (Cross-Complainant)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 12/01/2022
  • DocketUpdated -- Stipulation and Order TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANT AND CROSS-DEFENDANT STEVE NEMANY TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT AND CROSSCOMPLAINANT SKYVIEW HOMES INC.'S FIRST AMENDED CROSSCOMPLAINT; [PROPOSED] ORDER: Filed By: STEVE NEMANY (Cross-Defendant); Result: Granted ; Result Date: 12/01/2022

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/18/2022
  • DocketNotice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order; Filed by: Clerk

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
48 More Docket Entries
  • 03/28/2022
  • DocketProof of Service by Substituted Service; Filed by: Smart Bears, LLC, a California limited liability company (Plaintiff); As to: Skyview Homes, Inc., a California nonprofit corporation (Defendant); Proof of Mailing Date: 03/23/2022; Service Cost: 0.00; Service Cost Waived: No

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 03/17/2022
  • DocketNotice of Case Management Conference; Filed by: Clerk

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 03/17/2022
  • DocketCase Management Conference scheduled for 09/15/2022 at 08:30 AM in Chatsworth Courthouse at Department F49

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 03/17/2022
  • DocketCase Management Conference scheduled for 12/13/2022 at 08:30 AM in Chatsworth Courthouse at Department F49

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 03/16/2022
  • DocketCase assigned to Hon. Stephen P. Pfahler in Department F49 Chatsworth Courthouse

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 03/15/2022
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by: Smart Bears, LLC, a California limited liability company (Plaintiff); As to: Skyview Homes, Inc., a California nonprofit corporation (Defendant); Dronfield Investors, LLC, a California limited liability company (Defendant); Steve Nemany (Defendant)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 03/15/2022
  • DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: Smart Bears, LLC, a California limited liability company (Plaintiff); As to: Skyview Homes, Inc., a California nonprofit corporation (Defendant); Dronfield Investors, LLC, a California limited liability company (Defendant); Steve Nemany (Defendant)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 03/15/2022
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Smart Bears, LLC, a California limited liability company (Plaintiff); As to: Skyview Homes, Inc., a California nonprofit corporation (Defendant); Dronfield Investors, LLC, a California limited liability company (Defendant); Steve Nemany (Defendant)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 03/15/2022
  • DocketDeclaration of Compliance; Filed by: Smart Bears, LLC, a California limited liability company (Plaintiff); As to: Skyview Homes, Inc., a California nonprofit corporation (Defendant); Dronfield Investors, LLC, a California limited liability company (Defendant); Steve Nemany (Defendant)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 03/15/2022
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Unlimited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: *******0170 Hearing Date: August 15, 2022 Dept: F49

Dept. F-49

Date: 8-15-22

Case #*******0170

Trial Date: Not Set

DEMURRER

MOVING PARTY: Defendant, Steve Nemany

RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff, Smart Bears, LLC

RELIEF REQUESTED

Demurrer to the Complaint

1st Cause of Action: Breach of Equitable Servitudes (CC&Rs)

2nd Cause of Action: Breach of Fiduciary Duties

3rd Cause of Action: Negligence

4th Cause of Action: Nuisance

5th Cause of Action: Failure to Permit Inspection of Records

6th Cause of Action: Declaratory Relief

Motion to Strike the Entire Complaint

SUMMARY OF ACTION

Plaintiff Smart Bears, LLC owns three units within a real estate development governed by Defendant Skyview Homes, Inc. (HOA). The addresses are 13050 Dronfield Ave, Apt. 5, 13040 Dronfield Ave., Unit 10, and 13040 Dronfield Avenue, Unit 22. Defendants Steve Nemany (13050 Dronfield Ave., Unit 16), and Dronfield Investors, LLC (13040 Dronfield Ave., Apt. 23, 13040 Dronfield, Unit 11), are homeowners within the development as well. Units 10 and 11 are next door neighbors, Unit 23 sits directly below Unit 10, and Unit 5 sits below Unit 16. Plaintiff alleges the galvanized interior plumbing and cast iron sewer pipes are at least partially responsible for “continuous water intrusions” originating from common areas and/or neighboring units.

Plaintiff alleges section 4.02 of the CC&Rs require the HOA maintain the common areas in “good, clean, attractive and sanitary order and repair.” Common areas include area not owned by individual owners, including “space bounded by and contained within the interior unfinished surfaces of the perimeter walls, floors, ceilings, windows, window frames, doors and door frame and trim…” Plaintiff alleges numerous requests for repairs caused by water damage, and reimbursement following repairs and clean up expenses, which were met with a denial of responsibility.

On March 15, 2022, Plaintiff filed a 185 paragraph complaint for Breach of Equitable Servitudes (CC&Rs), Breach of Fiduciary Duties, Negligence, Nuisance, Failure to Permit Inspection of Records, and Declaratory Relief. On May 23, 2022, Defendant Skyview Homes, Inc. answered the complaint. On May 24, 2022, Skyview Homes, Inc. filed a cross-complaint against JC Rooter, Inc. and Julio Cesar Chavez for Implied Equitable Indemnity, Contribution and Apportionment of Fault, Breach of Contract, Negligence, and Declaratory Relief.

RULING

Demurrer: Overruled.

Defendant Steve Nemany brings the subject demurrer to the entire complaint, due to the failure to submit the action to alternative dispute resolution prior to filing the action even after Nemany agreed to participate in ADR. Plaintiff in opposition contends the requirements of Civil Code section 5930 are not applicable, due to $130,000 in damages sought, which is in excess of small claims court jurisdictional limits. Plaintiff also challenges the introduction of extrinsic material without seeking judicial notice. Regardless, Plaintiff additionally offers that the HOA refuses to participate in ADR either way, thereby necessitating the complaint. Plaintiff next contends the demurrer is both procedurally improper, due to the citation of an improper section of law, and that each every cause of action is sufficiently pled. Finally, Plaintiff proactively opposes any request for a stay as a result of the demurrer. The court electronic filing system shows no reply on file at the time of the tentative ruling publication cutoff.

A demurrer is an objection to a pleading, the grounds for which are apparent from either the face of the complaint or a matter of which the court may take judicial notice. (Code Civ. Proc., 430.30, subd. (a); see also Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318.) The purpose of a demurrer is to challenge the sufficiency of a pleading “by raising questions of law.” (Postley v. Harvey (1984) 153 Cal.App.3d 280, 286.) “In the construction of a pleading, for the purpose of determining its effect, its allegations must be liberally construed, with a view to substantial justice between the parties.” (Code Civ. Proc., 452.) The court “ ‘ “treat[s] the demurrer as admitting all material facts properly pleaded, but not contentions, deductions or conclusions of fact or law . . . .” ’ ” (Berkley v. Dowds (2007) 152 Cal.App.4th 518, 525.) In applying these standards, the court liberally construes the complaint to determine whether a cause of action has been stated. (Picton v. Anderson Union High School Dist. (1996) 50 Cal.App.4th 726, 733.) The court therefore declines to consider the exhibits attached to the demurrer, or the declarations submitted with the opposition.

It’s not clear from the demurrer itself that Nemany actually raises a challenge on grounds of uncertainty, but Plaintiff submits an opposition on this. “A demurrer for uncertainty is strictly construed, even where a complaint is in some respects uncertain, because ambiguities can be clarified under modern discovery procedures.” (Khoury v. Maly's of California, Inc. (1993) 14 Cal.App.4th 612, 616; Williams v. Beechnut Nutrition Corp. (1986) 185 Cal.App.3d 135, 139 [“[U]nder our liberal pleading rules, where the complaint contains substantive factual allegations sufficiently apprising defendant of the issues it is being asked to meet, a demurrer for uncertainty should be overruled or plaintiff given leave to amend.]

The court begins with the two governing sections raised in the demurrer.

(a) An association or a member may not file an enforcement action in the superior court unless the parties have endeavored to submit their dispute to alternative dispute resolution pursuant to this article.

(b) This section applies only to an enforcement action that is solely for declaratory, injunctive, or writ relief, or for that relief in conjunction with a claim for monetary damages not in excess of the jurisdictional limits stated in Sections 116.220 and 116.221 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

(Civ. Code, 5930.)

(a) At the time of commencement of an enforcement action, the party commencing the action shall file with the initial pleading a certificate stating that one or more of the following conditions are satisfied:

(1) Alternative dispute resolution has been completed in compliance with this article.

(2) One of the other parties to the dispute did not accept the terms offered for alternative dispute resolution.

(3) Preliminary or temporary injunctive relief is necessary.

(b) Failure to file a certificate pursuant to subdivision (a) is grounds for a demurrer or a motion to strike unless the court finds that dismissal of the action for failure to comply with this article would result in substantial prejudice to one of the parties.

(Civ. Code, 5950.)

Prayer for Relief section 1 seeks damages of $130,000, which exceeds the jurisdictional limits of Civil Code section 116.220 and 116.221. The complaint was therefore properly filed without any required certificate. Regardless, paragraph 121 of the complaint alleges the attempt to initiated mediation, but due to HOA inaction, no such mediation occurred. The court otherwise finds no noticed or supported challenge to the individual causes of action, and declines to address the opposition points on this. The demurrer is overruled.

Motion to Strike: Denied.

Like the demurrer, Nemany challenges the complaint on the language of Civil Code section 5950. Consistent with the reasoning in the demurrer, the motion to strike is denied.

In summary, the demurrer is overruled, and the motion to strike denied. Defendant is ordered to answer the complaint within 10 days of this ruling.

Moving Defendant to give notice to all parties.



related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where SMART BEARS LLC A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY is a litigant

Latest cases where CITY WIDE APARTMENT MANAGEMENT INC. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer PEARSON KIRK C