Search

Attributes

This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 06/11/2019 at 11:13:20 (UTC).

ZB N.A. VS MERUELO PROPERTIES INC ET AL

Case Summary

On 10/13/2017 ZB N A filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against MERUELO PROPERTIES INC. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****9554

  • Filing Date:

    10/13/2017

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Other Contract

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs and Petitioners

CALIFORNIA BANK & TRUST

ZB N.A.

ZB N.A. DBA CALIFORNIA BANK & TRUST

Defendants and Respondents

MERUELO RICHARD

MERUELO PROPERTIES INC

DOES 1 TO 20

MARTIN VIVIAN

MERUELO PROPERTIES INC.

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorney

SMITH BARRY A. ESQ.

Defendant Attorney

MARKS PAUL SEVERIN ESQ.

 

Court Documents

PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

1/19/2018: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT

2/16/2018: REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT

Minute Order

2/28/2018: Minute Order

MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION OF ISSUES

4/13/2018: MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION OF ISSUES

AMENDED NOTICE OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION OF ISSUES (DATE CHANGE ONLY)

6/7/2018: AMENDED NOTICE OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION OF ISSUES (DATE CHANGE ONLY)

DECLARATION OF ERIC S. MULYA IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION OF ISSUES

6/15/2018: DECLARATION OF ERIC S. MULYA IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION OF ISSUES

OBJECTIONS TO THE DECLARATION OF MICHAEL TOAL IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF?S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS? MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION OF ISSUES

6/28/2018: OBJECTIONS TO THE DECLARATION OF MICHAEL TOAL IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF?S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS? MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION OF ISSUES

PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF LODGING OF DEPOSITION TRANSCRIPT OF BRIAN H. KELLEY

7/27/2018: PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF LODGING OF DEPOSITION TRANSCRIPT OF BRIAN H. KELLEY

NOTICE OF HEARING ON PLAINTIFF'S APPLICATION TO COMPEL VIVIAN MARTIN TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AT DEPOSITION

8/1/2018: NOTICE OF HEARING ON PLAINTIFF'S APPLICATION TO COMPEL VIVIAN MARTIN TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AT DEPOSITION

Minute Order

8/2/2018: Minute Order

PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

9/17/2018: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

Minute Order

9/18/2018: Minute Order

Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment

12/28/2018: Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment

Trial Brief

1/22/2019: Trial Brief

Stipulation

1/25/2019: Stipulation

Notice of Entry of Dismissal and Proof of Service

3/8/2019: Notice of Entry of Dismissal and Proof of Service

Minute Order

5/6/2019: Minute Order

Minute Order

5/13/2019: Minute Order

77 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 05/14/2019
  • at 11:00 AM in Department 58; Voluntary Settlement Conference - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/14/2019
  • at 11:00 AM in Department 58; Jury Trial - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/14/2019
  • Minute Order ( (Jury Trial; Voluntary Settlement Conference)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/13/2019
  • at 09:00 AM in Department 58; Jury Trial - Held - Continued

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/13/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 58; Voluntary Settlement Conference - Held - Continued

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/13/2019
  • Minute Order ( (Jury Trial; Voluntary Settlement Conference;)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/06/2019
  • at 09:00 AM in Department 58; Jury Trial - Not Held - Continued - Stipulation

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/06/2019
  • at 09:00 AM in Department 58; Voluntary Settlement Conference - Not Held - Continued - Court's Motion

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/06/2019
  • Minute Order ( (Voluntary Settlement Conference)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/26/2019
  • Stipulation and Order (TO CONTINUE TRIAL); Filed by ZB, N.A. (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
125 More Docket Entries
  • 12/04/2017
  • FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR: 1) BREACH OF COMPLETION GUARANTY 2) FRAUD 3) TORT IN ESSENCE

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/04/2017
  • Complaint ((1st)); Filed by ZB, N.A. (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/04/2017
  • First Amended Complaint; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/23/2017
  • ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE HEARING

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/23/2017
  • OSC-Failure to File Proof of Serv; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/23/2017
  • NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/23/2017
  • Notice of Case Management Conference; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/13/2017
  • COMPLAINT FOR: 1) BREACH OF COMPLETION GUARANTY ;ETC

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/13/2017
  • SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/13/2017
  • Complaint; Filed by ZB, N.A. (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC679554    Hearing Date: May 3, 2021    Dept: 58

Judge John P. Doyle

Department 58


Hearing Date: May 3, 2021

Case Name: ZB, N.A. v. Meruelo Properties, Inc., et al.

Case No.: BC679554

Matter: Motion to Tax Costs

Moving Party: Plaintiff ZB, N.A.

Responding Party: Defendant Richard Meruelo


Tentative Ruling: The Motion is granted in part.


On February 5, 2021, the Court entered judgment pursuant to a referee award rendered by Judge Michael Johnson. The judgment is in favor of Defendant Richard Meruelo but provides that “plaintiff shall be entitled to recovery of costs from defendant in the amount of $14,100.00 (fourteen thousand, one hundred dollars), representing defendant's share of reference fees that were advanced by plaintiff (which award of $14,100.00 in costs to plaintiff shall be subject to adjustment for any costs awarded to defendant by this Court).”

On March 9, 2021, Defendant Richard Meruelo filed a memorandum of costs in the amount of $30,053.21.

Plaintiff ZB, N.A. seeks to strike the following costs:

¿ “Filing and motion fees” for a total of $16,055.00;

¿ “Court-ordered transcripts” for a total of $3,795.93;

¿ “Models, enlargements, and photocopies of exhibits” for a total of $830.60; and

¿ “Other” (Computer research) for a total of $7,805.82.

As to research costs in the amount of $7,805.82, these costs are not explicitly allowed by Code Civ. Proc. § 1033.5 and the Court, in its discretion, will not award such costs. These costs are sticken.

As to transcript costs, Plaintiff argues that these costs are not recoverable because the transcripts were not ordered by the Court. Defendant fails to respond to this argument, such that it is conceded. These costs are stricken.

As to costs associated with exhibits, Plaintiff argues that Defendant did not photocopy anywhere near the number of pages claimed for the purposes of trial. Defendant does not respond to this argument such that these costs are stricken.

As to filing fees, Plaintiff argues none of the costs are substantiated but that particularly $14,100 in referee fees are unwarranted under Code Civ. Proc. § 1033.5. Defendant argues the referee costs are warranted under Code Civ. Proc. § 998 as Defendant’s 998 offer was rejected by Plaintiff who did not obtain a better result after trial. Defendant also argues the parties amended their agreement to split referee fees.

The referee costs are not apparently warranted as Code Civ. Proc. § 998 does not relate to these costs. (See Chaaban v. Wet Seal, Inc. (2012) 203 Cal.App.4th 49, 55.) Further, Judge Johnson specifically stated he would make a ruling as to referee fees; that ruling was in favor of Plaintiff.

In sum, the Motion is granted in part. All costs at issue for the Motion are sticken except $1,955 in filing fees. Thus, the amount in costs to be awarded to Defendant is $3,520.86. Of course, the judgment still provides for $14,100 for Plaintiff such that there should be an offset. So in reality, Defendant should pay Plaintiff $10,579.14.

Case Number: BC679554    Hearing Date: March 18, 2021    Dept: 58

Judge John P. Doyle

Department 58


Hearing Date: March 18, 2021

Case Name: ZB, N.A. v. Meruelo Properties, Inc., et al.

Case No.: BC679554

Matter: Motion to Tax Costs

Moving Party: Defendant Richard Meruelo

Responding Party: Plaintiff ZB, N.A.


Tentative Ruling: The Motion is denied.


On February 5, 2021, the Court entered judgment pursuant to a referee award rendered by Judge Michael Johnson. The judgment is in favor of Defendant Richard Meruelo but provides that “ plaintiff shall be entitled to recovery of costs from defendant in the amount of $14,100.00 (fourteen thousand, one hundred dollars), representing defendant's share of reference fees that were advanced by plaintiff (which award of $14,100.00 in costs to plaintiff shall be subject to adjustment for any costs awarded to defendant by this Court).”

Defendant Richard Meruelo seeks to tax Plaintiff’s $14,100 in costs. Defendant argues that Plaintiff is not entitled to costs because Defendant made a 998 offer before trial which was rejected by Plaintiff. Because Defendant then prevailed at trial, Defendant argues that under Code Civ. Proc. § 998 Plaintiff must pay Defendant’s post-offer costs.

Defendant’s Motion is improper because Plaintiff did not file a memorandum of costs. (See Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1700.) Rather, the subject cost award has already been entered as a judgment. Therefore, in reality, Defendant requests that the judgment be amended. This, however, is not permissible. There are very limited bases upon which there can be an amendment: specifically, clerical error, or the need to add a joint debtor or alter ego. (Wegner et al., Cal. Prac. Guide Civ. Trials & Ev. (The Rutter Guide 2020) Ch. 18-C.)

Thus, to the extent Defendant contends he is entitled not to pay the subject cost award, then Defendant can attempt to obtain his own cost award as an offset. Based on the Court’s docket, it appears Defendant is already attempting this.

In sum, the Motion is denied.

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where ZB, N. A., a National banking association is a litigant

Latest cases where ZIONS BANCORPORATION N.A. DBA CALIFORNIA BANK & TRUST FKA ZB N.A. is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer SMITH BARRY A. ESQ.