This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 11/22/2020 at 06:01:16 (UTC).

TINALUX ASSOCIATES, LP VS BLUE HOLE CARIBBEAN CUISINE, INC.

Case Summary

On 11/07/2018 TINALUX ASSOCIATES, LP filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against BLUE HOLE CARIBBEAN CUISINE, INC. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Torrance Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are RAMONA G. SEE and DEIRDRE HILL. The case status is Disposed - Dismissed.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******0072

  • Filing Date:

    11/07/2018

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Dismissed

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Other Contract

  • Courthouse:

    Torrance Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judges

RAMONA G. SEE

DEIRDRE HILL

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Cross Defendant

TINALUX ASSOCIATES LP

Defendants and Cross Plaintiffs

BLUE HOLE CARIBBEAN CUISINE INC. DBA PEPPERS JAMAICAN BELIZEON CUISINE A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION

BULLER YVONNE

MATA CHRISTOPHER

BLUE HOLE CARIBBEAN CUISINE INC.

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Defendant, Plaintiff and Cross Defendant Attorney

STROJ ROBERT JOHN

Defendant, Cross Plaintiff and Cross Defendant Attorneys

EGHBALI DORON

STROJ ROBERT JOHN

Defendant and Cross Plaintiff Attorney

EGHBALI DORON

 

Court Documents

Order - ORDER [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING ATTORNEY'S MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL

9/22/2020: Order - ORDER [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING ATTORNEY'S MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL

Notice of Ruling

9/22/2020: Notice of Ruling

Substitution of Attorney

9/14/2020: Substitution of Attorney

Notice of Case Reassignment and Order for Plaintiff to Give Notice

5/29/2020: Notice of Case Reassignment and Order for Plaintiff to Give Notice

Declaration - DECLARATION OF ROBERT STROJ IN SUPPORT OF TINALUX ASSOCIATES, BLUE HOLE LP'S MOTION TO COMPEL CUISINE, INC. DBA PEPPERS CARIBBEAN JAMAICAN BKLIZEON CUISINE'S TO FORM FURTHER RESPONSES IN

11/18/2019: Declaration - DECLARATION OF ROBERT STROJ IN SUPPORT OF TINALUX ASSOCIATES, BLUE HOLE LP'S MOTION TO COMPEL CUISINE, INC. DBA PEPPERS CARIBBEAN JAMAICAN BKLIZEON CUISINE'S TO FORM FURTHER RESPONSES IN

Separate Statement

11/18/2019: Separate Statement

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON EX PARTE APPLICATION MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL)

9/19/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON EX PARTE APPLICATION MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL)

Answer - CROSS-DEFENDANT CHRIS MATA'S ANSWER TO BLUE HOLE CARIBBEAN CUISINE, INC. DBA PEPPERS JAMAICA BELIZEON CUISINE'S SECOND AMENDED CROSS-COMPLAINT

7/29/2019: Answer - CROSS-DEFENDANT CHRIS MATA'S ANSWER TO BLUE HOLE CARIBBEAN CUISINE, INC. DBA PEPPERS JAMAICA BELIZEON CUISINE'S SECOND AMENDED CROSS-COMPLAINT

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON PLAINTIFF'S, TINALUX ASSOCIATES, LP'S, DEMURRER TO...)

7/17/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON PLAINTIFF'S, TINALUX ASSOCIATES, LP'S, DEMURRER TO...)

Reply - PLAINTIFF AND CROSS-DEFENDANT TINALUX ASSOCIATES, LP'S REPLY TO BLUE HOLE'S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF CROSS-COMPLAINANT'S BLUE HOLE CARIBBEAN'S SECOND AMENDED CROSS-COMPLAINT

7/11/2019: Reply - PLAINTIFF AND CROSS-DEFENDANT TINALUX ASSOCIATES, LP'S REPLY TO BLUE HOLE'S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF CROSS-COMPLAINANT'S BLUE HOLE CARIBBEAN'S SECOND AMENDED CROSS-COMPLAINT

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE)

6/19/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE)

Notice - NOTICE OF CONTINUED CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

5/1/2019: Notice - NOTICE OF CONTINUED CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Reply - REPLY TO BLUE HOLE'S OPPOSITION TO DEMURRER TO FIRST AMENDED CROSS-COMPLAINT

5/7/2019: Reply - REPLY TO BLUE HOLE'S OPPOSITION TO DEMURRER TO FIRST AMENDED CROSS-COMPLAINT

Motion re: - MOTION RE: TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF CROSS-COMPLAINANT'S FIRST AMENDED CROSS-COMPLAINT

4/8/2019: Motion re: - MOTION RE: TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF CROSS-COMPLAINANT'S FIRST AMENDED CROSS-COMPLAINT

Case Management Statement

3/25/2019: Case Management Statement

Case Management Statement

3/19/2019: Case Management Statement

Case Management Statement

3/6/2019: Case Management Statement

Answer

12/28/2018: Answer

73 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 11/20/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department B; Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (for Failure to Prosecute Complaint and Cross-Complaint Absent Legal Representation) - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/20/2020
  • DocketCertificate of Mailing for ((Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal for Failure to Prosecute Co...) of 11/20/2020); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/20/2020
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal for Failure to Prosecute Co...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/19/2020
  • DocketNotice (of Order Granting Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel); Filed by Tinalux Associates, LP (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/22/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department B; Order to Show Cause Re: (Sanctions on Counsel for Defendant/Cross-Complainant for Failure to Appear on 6/24/20) - Not Held - Vacated by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/22/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department B; Hearing on Motion to be Relieved as Counsel ((Plaintiff)) - Held - Motion Granted

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/22/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department B; Trial Setting Conference - Not Held - Vacated by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/22/2020
  • DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by Tinalux Associates, LP (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/22/2020
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Trial Setting Conference; Hearing on Motion to be Relieved as...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/22/2020
  • DocketOrder ([Proposed] Order Granting Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel); Filed by Tinalux Associates, LP (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
93 More Docket Entries
  • 12/28/2018
  • DocketProof of Service by Mail; Filed by Yvonne Buller (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/28/2018
  • DocketAnswer; Filed by Blue Hole Caribbean Cuisine, Inc. (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/03/2018
  • DocketProof of Service by Substituted Service; Filed by Tinalux Associates, LP (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/03/2018
  • DocketProof of Service by Substituted Service; Filed by Tinalux Associates, LP (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/20/2018
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause Failure to File Proof of Service; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/07/2018
  • DocketNotice of Case Management Conference; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/07/2018
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by Tinalux Associates, LP (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/07/2018
  • DocketSummons (on Complaint); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/07/2018
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Unlimited Civil Case; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/07/2018
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by Tinalux Associates, LP (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: 18TRCV00072    Hearing Date: February 09, 2021    Dept: B

LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT – SOUTHWEST DISTRICT

Honorable Gary Y. Tanaka

Department B

Tuesday – February 9, 2021

Calendar No. 11

PROCEEDINGS

Gregory T. Swick v. Brett Butler, et al.

18TRCV00072

  1. Excel Office Services’ Motion to Modify Right to Attach Order

    TENTATIVE RULING

    Excel Office Services’ Motion to Modify Right to Attach Order is denied.

    However, pursuant to CCP § 128, the Court sets, on its own motion, a motion to correct a clerical error in its order of November 10, 2020. CCP § 128 states: “The court may, upon motion of the injured party, or its own motion, correct clerical mistakes in its judgment or orders as entered, so as to conform to the judgment or order directed.”

    The Court’s order of November 10, 2020 mistakenly granted a writ of attachment and right to attach order against a non-party Excel Office Services to which the Court had no jurisdiction. Thus, the Court, on its own motion, sets a hearing to set aside its own order, only as to the non-party. As CCP § 128 provides that the Court may correct mistakes on its own motion, the parties are entitled to notice of a hearing date, and it is not appropriate for the Court to do so at the current hearing, because the only notice provided is for Excel Office Services’ Motion to Modify Right to Attach Order.

    Excel Office Services’ motion must be denied because Excel did not provide any authority for the order that it seeks. Excel specifically states that it is not relying on CCP § 485.240 for the relief that it is seeking. Instead, Excel argues that the Court is not solely dependent on this statute, but, does not provide any alternative procedural ground for the relief that it seeks. Excel makes reference to CCP § 490.010 and CCP § 490.020. CCP § 490.010 merely describes and defines wrongful attachment. CCP § 490.020 provides for damages and attorneys’ fees for a wrongful attachment. However, the definition of wrongful attachment set forth in Section 490.010 specifically requires a levy. Here, there has been no showing that Plaintiff has levied upon moving non-party’s property.

    Plaintiff’s request for a continuance of Excel’s motion is denied. The request for continuance is based on the purported bankruptcy stay. However, the bankruptcy case was only filed by Brett Butler. The automatic bankruptcy stay would not apply to Excel Office Services until and unless Excel Office Services files and obtains such a stay from either the Bankruptcy Court, or the instant Court. Plaintiff’s argument that the stay applies to “all parties” as indicated by the Notice of Stay filed by Butler is of no consequence as Excel Office Services is not a “party” to this case.

    Thus, Excel Office Services’ motion is denied.

    The Court will set, on its own motion, a motion to set aside its own order of November 10, 2020 to be heard on a date agreed to by counsel and the Court. The parties may file and serve respective briefs, no more than 5 pages in length, by 9 court days prior to this hearing.

Case Number: 18TRCV00072    Hearing Date: September 22, 2020    Dept: B

LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT – SOUTHWEST DISTRICT

Honorable Gary Y. Tanaka

Department B

Thursday – September 22, 2020

Calendar No. 7

PROCEEDINGS

Tinalux Associates, LP v. Blue Hole Caribbean Cuisine, Inc., et al.

18TRCV00072

1. Robert J. Stroj’s, Counsel for Plaintiff Tinalux Associates, LP’s, Motion to be Relieved

TENTATIVE RULING

Robert J. Stroj’s, Counsel for Plaintiff Tinalux Associates, LP’s, Motion to be Relieved as Counsel is granted.

Counsel states, in his declaration, valid reasons for withdrawal.

The court finds that the attorney has served the client and filed a declaration establishing that the service requirements of California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1362 have been satisfied. The court also finds that the attorney has shown sufficient reasons why the motion to be relieved as counsel should be granted, and why counsel has brought a motion under Code of Civil Procedure § 284(2) instead of filing a consent under section § 284(1).

The motion is therefore granted.

The court orders that counsel is relieved as the attorney of record for Plaintiff Tinalux Associates, L.P. effective upon the filing of a proof of service of the signed “Order Granting Attorney’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel – Civil” (Judicial Council form MC-053) upon the client. Plaintiff’s counsel is ordered to give notice of this ruling and the “Order Granting Attorney’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel – Civil” (Judicial Council form MC-053).

Case Number: 18TRCV00072    Hearing Date: September 21, 2020    Dept: B

LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT – SOUTHWEST DISTRICT

Honorable Gary Y. Tanaka

Department B

Thursday – September 22, 2020

Calendar No. 7

PROCEEDINGS

Tinalux Associates, LP v. Blue Hole Caribbean Cuisine, Inc., et al.

18TRCV00072

  1. Robert J. Stroj’s, Counsel for Plaintiff Tinalux Associates, LP’s, Motion to be Relieved

TENTATIVE RULING

Robert J. Stroj’s, Counsel for Plaintiff Tinalux Associates, LP’s, Motion to be Relieved as Counsel is granted.

Counsel states, in his declaration, valid reasons for withdrawal.

The court finds that the attorney has served the client and filed a declaration establishing that the service requirements of California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1362 have been satisfied. The court also finds that the attorney has shown sufficient reasons why the motion to be relieved as counsel should be granted, and why counsel has brought a motion under Code of Civil Procedure § 284(2) instead of filing a consent under section § 284(1).

The motion is therefore granted.

The court orders that counsel is relieved as the attorney of record for Plaintiff Tinalux Associates, L.P. effective upon the filing of a proof of service of the signed “Order Granting Attorney’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel – Civil” (Judicial Council form MC-053) upon the client. Plaintiff’s counsel is ordered to give notice of this ruling and the “Order Granting Attorney’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel – Civil” (Judicial Council form MC-053).

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where Tinalux Associates, LP is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer EGHBALI DORON F. ESQ.