This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 06/11/2020 at 17:43:37 (UTC).

WESTERN PACIFIC HOUSING LLC ET AL VS JAG ARCHITECTS INC

Case Summary

On 06/01/2018 WESTERN PACIFIC HOUSING LLC filed a Contract - Insurance lawsuit against JAG ARCHITECTS INC. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are SAMANTHA P. JESSNER, ALAN S. ROSENFIELD, YOLANDA OROZCO and DANIEL S. MURPHY. The case status is Other.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****8523

  • Filing Date:

    06/01/2018

  • Case Status:

    Other

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Insurance

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judges

SAMANTHA P. JESSNER

ALAN S. ROSENFIELD

YOLANDA OROZCO

DANIEL S. MURPHY

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs, Petitioners, Cross Defendants and Not Classified By Court

WASHINGTON VIEW LP

WESTERN PACIFIC HOUSING LLC

FALLBROOK DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LLC

SANTA MARIA GROUP INC

ROES 1-50

FALLBROOK CAPITAL SECURITIES CORPORATION

SANTA MARIA GROUP INC.

FALLBROOK COMPANIES LLC

ROES 1 THROUGH 100

JAG ARCHITECTS INC.

Defendants, Respondents and Cross Plaintiffs

JAG ARCHITECTS INC

DOES 1 TO 100

JAG ARCHITECTS INC.

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff, Petitioner and Not Classified By Court Attorneys

GLICKMAN STEVEN C. ESQ.

GLICKMAN & GLICKMAN ALC

HOIKKA NICOLE E

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorney

GLICKMAN STEVEN C. ESQ.

Not Classified By Court, Defendant and Cross Plaintiff Attorneys

WEIL & DRAGE APC

WEIL & DRAGE

STACY PETER LEIGHTON

Cross Defendant and Cross Plaintiff Attorneys

DAVIS RYAN S

WEIL & DRAGE APC

WEIL & DRAGE

STACY PETER LEIGHTON

Plaintiff, Cross Defendant and Not Classified By Court Attorneys

GLICKMAN & GLICKMAN ALC

HOIKKA NICOLE E

WITKOW BRANDON J

Attorney at witkow | baskin

21031 Ventura Blvd Suite 603

Woodland Hills, CA 91364

DAVIS RYAN S

JOHNSON S.V. STUART

GLICKMAN STEVEN C

WEIL & DRAGE APC

 

Court Documents

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER)

11/4/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER)

Notice - NOTICE PLAINTIFFS' NON OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT JAG ARCHITECTS, INC.'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION

11/25/2019: Notice - NOTICE PLAINTIFFS' NON OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT JAG ARCHITECTS, INC.'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION

Motion for Summary Judgment

9/23/2019: Motion for Summary Judgment

Notice - NOTICE TABLE OF CONTENTS OF EVIDENCE

9/23/2019: Notice - NOTICE TABLE OF CONTENTS OF EVIDENCE

Notice - NOTICE OF CONTINUED HEARING ON MOTION FOR DETERMINATION OF GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENT

6/17/2019: Notice - NOTICE OF CONTINUED HEARING ON MOTION FOR DETERMINATION OF GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENT

Objection - OBJECTION EVIDENTIARY TO DECLARATION OF JAMES SANTA MARIA

5/6/2019: Objection - OBJECTION EVIDENTIARY TO DECLARATION OF JAMES SANTA MARIA

Answer

2/1/2019: Answer

Case Management Statement

1/10/2019: Case Management Statement

Challenge To Judicial Officer - Peremptory (170.6)

11/28/2018: Challenge To Judicial Officer - Peremptory (170.6)

Notice - Cross-Defendant Santa Maria Group, Inc.'s Notice of Rescheduled Demurrer Hearing

12/18/2018: Notice - Cross-Defendant Santa Maria Group, Inc.'s Notice of Rescheduled Demurrer Hearing

JAG ARCHITECTS, INC.'S FIRST AMENDED CROSS-COMPLAINT FOR: (1) IMPLIED INDEMNITY; ETC.

9/21/2018: JAG ARCHITECTS, INC.'S FIRST AMENDED CROSS-COMPLAINT FOR: (1) IMPLIED INDEMNITY; ETC.

JAG ARCHITECTS, INC.'S FIRST AMENDED ANSWER TO WESTERN PACIFIC HOUSING, LLC AND WASHINGTON VIEW LP'S COMPLAINT

9/21/2018: JAG ARCHITECTS, INC.'S FIRST AMENDED ANSWER TO WESTERN PACIFIC HOUSING, LLC AND WASHINGTON VIEW LP'S COMPLAINT

Answer - Answer Joint Answer of Cross-Defendants

12/4/2018: Answer - Answer Joint Answer of Cross-Defendants

Proof of Service by Mail

10/23/2018: Proof of Service by Mail

Notice - OF INTENT TO APPEAR BY PHONE

10/11/2018: Notice - OF INTENT TO APPEAR BY PHONE

JAG ARCHITECTS, INC.'S ANSWER TO WESTERN PACIFIC HOUSING, LLC AND WASHINGTON VIEW LP'S COMPLAINT

8/13/2018: JAG ARCHITECTS, INC.'S ANSWER TO WESTERN PACIFIC HOUSING, LLC AND WASHINGTON VIEW LP'S COMPLAINT

NOTICE OF OSC RE DISMISSAL; AND NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

6/21/2018: NOTICE OF OSC RE DISMISSAL; AND NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

CIVIL DEPOSIT

6/21/2018: CIVIL DEPOSIT

87 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 05/22/2020
  • DocketRequest for Dismissal; Filed by Western Pacific Housing, LLC (DISM) (Plaintiff); Washington View, LP (DISM) (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/22/2020
  • DocketRequest for Dismissal; Filed by Western Pacific Housing, LLC (DISM) (Cross-Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/06/2020
  • Docketat 09:51 AM in Department 32, Daniel S. Murphy, Presiding; Court Order

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/06/2020
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Court Order)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/06/2020
  • DocketCertificate of Mailing for ((Court Order) of 05/06/2020); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/01/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 32, Daniel S. Murphy, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (Settlement) - Not Held - Advanced and Continued - by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/13/2020
  • Docketat 3:37 PM in Department 32, Daniel S. Murphy, Presiding; Court Order

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/13/2020
  • DocketCertificate of Mailing for ((Court Order) of 04/13/2020); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/13/2020
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Court Order)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/02/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 32, Daniel S. Murphy, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (Settlement) - Not Held - Continued - Court's Motion

    Read MoreRead Less
120 More Docket Entries
  • 06/21/2018
  • DocketNOTICE OF OSC RE DISMISSAL; AND NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/21/2018
  • DocketCIVIL DEPOSIT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/07/2018
  • DocketOSC-Failure to File Proof of Serv; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/07/2018
  • DocketORDER TO SHOW CAUSE HEARING

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/07/2018
  • DocketNOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/07/2018
  • DocketNotice of Case Management Conference; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/01/2018
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by Western Pacific Housing, LLC (DISM) (Plaintiff); Washington View, LP (DISM) (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/01/2018
  • DocketCOMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES: PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/01/2018
  • DocketCERTIFICATE OF MERIT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/01/2018
  • DocketSUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC708523    Hearing Date: December 09, 2019    Dept: 32

WESTERN PACIFIC HOUSING LLC & Washington View, LP,

Plaintiffs,

v.

JAG ARCHITECTS, INC., et. al.

Defendants.

Case No.: BC708523

Hearing Date: December 9, 2019

[TENTATIVE] order RE:

Motion for summary adjudication of consequential damages

BACKGROUND

A. Complaint

Plaintiffs Western Pacific Housing LLC (“Western”) and Washington View LP (“Washington View”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) commenced this action against Defendant JAG Architects, Inc. (“JAG”) on June 1, 2018. The Complaint asserts a single cause of action for professional negligence. The Complaint alleges in pertinent part as follows.

Plaintiffs retained JAG to perform architectural services for a project known as the Washington View Apartments (“Project”). JAG was responsible for determining all zoning issues relating to the Project. These responsibilities included the creation of a “density matrix” reflecting the size and number of the proposed units that could be built on the Project Site. JAG miscalculated its zoning determinations resulting in total losses to Plaintiffs exceeding $1 million.

B. Cross-Complaints

On August 13, 2018, JAG cross-complained against Santa Maria Group, Inc. (“SMG”), Fallbrook Development Company, LLC (“Fallbrook”), Fallbrook Capital Securities Corporation, and Fallbrook Companies LLC. JAG’s operative cross-complaint asserts causes of action for (1) implied indemnity; (2) equitable indemnity; (3) comparative negligence and contribution; (4) breach of contract; (5) express indemnity; (6) negligent misrepresentation; (7) declaratory relief; and (8) apportionment/contribution.

On December 4, 2018, Fallbrook cross-complained against Western. Fallbrook’s operative cross-complaint asserts causes of action for (1) breach of contract; (2) express, equitable, and implied indemnity; (3) comparative negligence and contribution; and (4) declaratory judgment.

LEGAL STANDARD

CCP section 437c(c) states: “The motion for summary judgment shall be granted if all the papers submitted show that there is no triable issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.” A material fact is one that “must relate to some claim or defense in issue under the pleadings, and it must also be essential to the judgment in some way.” (Riverside County Community Facilities District v. Bainbridge 17 (1999) 77 Cal.App.4th 644, 653.) The court may not weigh the evidence. (Mann v. Cracchiolo (1985) 38 Cal.3d 18, 39.) A motion for summary adjudication may be made by itself or as an alternative to a motion for summary judgment and shall proceed in all procedural respects as a motion for summary judgment. (CCP § 437c(f)(2).) The moving party bears an initial burden of production to make a prima facie showing of the nonexistence of any triable issue of material fact, and if he does so, the burden shifts to the opposing party to make a prima facie showing of the existence of a triable issue of material fact. (Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 850-51.)

DISCUSSION

Defendant JAG moves for summary adjudication of Plaintiffs’ claim for consequential damages. JAG argues that Plaintiffs contractually waived their right to claim those damages.

JAG’s motion is not authorized under the summary judgment statute. CCP section 437 states in pertinent part: “A party may move for summary adjudication as to … one or more claims for damages … if the party contends that … there is no merit to a claim for damages, as specified in Section 3294 of the Civil Code….” (CCP § 437c(f)(1) (emphasis added).) According to the Court of Appeals, the reference to “one or more claims for damages” in the first part of this sentence is “qualified by, and limited to, punitive damages.” (DeCastro West Chodorow & Burns, Inc. v. Superior Court (1996) 47 Cal.App.4th 410, 421 (rejecting motion for summary adjudication of plaintiff’s claim for lost opportunity damages).) As such, a party cannot bring a motion for summary adjudication of a claim for consequential damages.

JAG’s motion for summary adjudication is DENIED. This ruling does not affect JAG’s right to bring a motion in limine to preclude the presentation of evidence of consequential damages at trial.