Millenium Properties Inc. vs. Katherine E. Bisson

Reply to Opposition

Cal. Super. - 4th Dist.May 10, 2017

~N O Y a B A W 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2 28 Todd J. Cleary, Esq., SBN 144358 Law Office of Todd J Cleary 10720 McCune Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90034 Attorneys for: DEFENDANT ADAM MUSSAVIR ELECTROMICALLY FILED Superior Court of Califarnia, County of Orange 07/23/2019 at 04:22:00 PM Clerk of the Superior Court By & Clerk, Deputy Clerk SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE MILLINIUM PROPERTIES INC, a Wyoming Corp, Plaintiff, Vv. KATHERINE E. BISSON, an individual; ALBERT R. BISSON, an individual ADAM MUSAVVIR, an individual; and DOES 1 TO 100 inclusive, Defendants. CASE NO.: 30-2017-00919447-CU-OR-CJC Hon. Robert J. Moss Dept. C14 REPY TO OBJECTION TO PROPOSED STATEMENT OF DECISION [CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE §632] TRIAL DATE: JUNE 24, 2019 TIME: 10:00 AM PLACE: DEPT. C14, Following this Court’s June 24% 2019 Decision finding in favor of Defendant, Plaintiff’s counsel asked the court for a written statement of Decision. The Court delegated to the prevailing party, Defendant herein, the task of preparing a Statement of Decision for this Court’s review and, if appropriate, revision. The court directed Defendant’s counsel to prepare simple Statement of Decision sticking to its finding that Plaintiff’s case failed to prove two essential elements and the Court’s finding of credibility for both of Defendant’s witnesses. Defendant filed and served its Proposed Statement of Decision on June 26" 2019. Service was by email as well as US Postal Service. See Exhibits A and B to the Declaration of Todd J. Cleary attached hereto. REPLY TO OBJECTION TO PROPOSED STATEMENT OF DECISION ~N O Y a B A W 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2 28 The deadline to file and serve an objection to a statement of decision in California is within 15 days after the proposed statement of decision has been served pursuant to California Rule of Court 3.1590(g) which states that, “Any party may, within 15 days after the proposed statement of decision and judgment have been served, serve and file objections to the proposed statement of decision or judgment.” [emphases added] The Objection to the Proposed Statement of Decision is late, it was served on July 16, 2019 (see Exhibit C to Declaration of Todd J Cleary) and filed with the court on July 17, 2019. (See Exhibit D to the Declaration of Todd J Cleary). This Objection is late in that it was served 20 days after service of the Proposed Statement of Decision and filed 21 days after the Proposed Statement of Decision was served. Even if the time for serving and filing the objection was extended by 5 days pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure 1013, the filing was late being 21 days after the proposed Statement of Decision was both emailed and mailed to his counsel. Each of the two procedural prongs of objection must be satisfied within the 15 day period, the Plaintiff needed to “serve and file” the objection by July 16' at the latest. He did not. Being late, this objection should be disregarded and the Proposed Statement of Decision should be made the final Statement of Decision. This objection is really a plea to the Court by a litigant unhappy with the Court’s decision. The court had no requirement to provide a statement of decision other than that which was made orally in court, as the case was decided in one day and substantially less than 8 hours. (Civil Code 632). Plaintiff is not even entitled to a written statement of decision; it is certainly not entitled to the rehearing of the evidence. If the court wants to consider this objection, to which the Defendant strenuously objects, the objection should be overruled on its merits for being more of an argument over the facts and law found by the court than a correction of the Proposed Statement of Decision. Not a single correction to the Proposed Statement of Decision is suggested. “The court’s statement of decision is sufficient if it fairly discloses the court’s determination as to the ultimate facts and material issues in the case.” (Golden Eagle Ins. Co. v. 2 REPLY TO OBJECTION TO PROPOSED STATEMENT OF DECISION ~N O Y a B A W 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2 28 Foremost Ins. Co. (1993) 20 Cal.App.4th 1372, 1380 ("Golden Eagle”).) There is no requirement that the Court opine on subsidiary matters to bolster a losing party’s anticipated appeal. The Court need not address how it resolved intermediate evidentiary conflicts, or respond point-by-point to the various issues posed in a request for statement of decision. (Muzquiz v. City of Emeryville (2000) 79 Cal.App.4th 1106, 1126.) This case, like nearly all other 1 day trials, is not so complicated as to necessitate the court to explain the basis of the Court’s decision. see Golden Eagle, supra, 20 Cal. App.4th 1372, 1380 [finding that a statement of decision adequately covered the principal issues in spite of the fact that it failed to respond to a party’s outline of 36 issues claimed to be in controversy] Plaintiff’s version of the facts are unsupported by the evidence at trial and Plaintiff’s distorted view of the law was implicitly rejected by this Court in reaching its (correct) decision. Defendant proposes that since the court found that Defendants two witnesses were credible and they both deny that Defendant had any intent to interfere with the proposed contract, the court find in favor of the Defendant on the credible evidence before it and make the proposed Statement of Decision its final Statement of Decision. Dated: July 21, 2019 LAW OFFICES OF TODD CLEARY By = 7 _- Todd Cleary, Esq. Attorneys for Defendant Adam Musavvir 3 REPLY TO OBJECTION TO PROPOSED STATEMENT OF DECISION ~N O Y a B A W 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2 28 DECLARATION OF TODD J CLEARY IN SUPPORT OF REPLY TO OBJECTION TO PROPOSED STATEMENT OF DECISION I, TODD J CLEARY, hereby declare as follows: . I'am an Attorney licensed to practice in the courts in California and represent the Defendant Adam Musavvir in this case. I make the following declaration from my own knowledge. On June 26, 2019 I served and filed with the Court a Proposed Statement of Decision. Attached hereto as Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of the Proof of Service of the Proposed Statement of Decision on the Plaintiff’s counsel. . Attached hereto as Exhibit B is a true and correct copy of the Notice of Confirmation of Filing which I received from the Clerk of Court regarding this Proposed Statement of Decision. On July 19, 2019, I received an envelope in the mail containing the Plaintiff’s Objection to Proposed Statement of Decision in this matter. Attached hereto as Exhibit C is a true and correct image of the outside front cover of this envelope (hereinafter the “Envelope”). . The postmark on the Envelope states that the postage was paid for this Envelope on July 16, 2019 from Fresno, California. It is conclusive evidence that this Envelope was mailed on July 16, 2019, not on the date set forth in the Proof of Service executed by Joseph West. He lies therein and states he served this Objection to Proposed Statement of Decision on July 11, 2019. On July 19, 2019, I also received electronic service of the Proposed Statement of Decision from the Orange County Clerk of Court. Attached hereto as Exhibit D is a true and correct copy of the first 2 pages of the Electronic Proof of Service together with the email which transmitted the Proof of Service which clearly indicate that the Plaintiff’s Objection to the Proposed Statement of Decision was filed on July 19, 2019. 4 REPLY TO OBJECTION TO PROPOSED STATEMENT OF DECISION ~N O Y a B A W 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2 28 I declare under penalty of perjury according to the laws of the United States that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 21st day of July, 2019. BD) Todd J Cleary Declarant 5 REPLY TO OBJECTION TO PROPOSED STATEMENT OF DECISION Exhibit A EXHIBIT A FOR COURT USE ONLY SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ORANGE STREET ADDRESS: 700 W. Civic Center Drive MAILING ADDRESS: 700 W. Civic Center Drive CITY AND ZIP CODE: Santa Ana CA 92701 BRANCH NAME: Central ustice Center SHORT TITLE: Millenium Properties Inc. vs. Bisson NOTICE OF CONFIRMATION OF ELECTRONIC FILING CASE NUMBER: 30-2017-00919447-CU-OR-CJ C The Electronic Filing described by the below summary data was reviewed and accepted by the Superior Court of California, County of Orange. In order to process the filing, the fee shown was assessed. Electronic Filing Summary Data Electronically Submitted By: Adam Musavvir On Behalf of: Adam Musavvir; CCMS ID: 77056193 Transaction Number: 2809715 Court Received Date: 06/26/2019 Court Received Time: 02:24:38 PM Filed Date: 06/26/2019 Filed Time: 02:24 PM Fee Amount Assessed: $0.00 Case Number: 30-2017-00919447-CU-OR-C) C Case Title: Millenium Properties Inc. vs. Bisson Location: Central J ustice Center Case Type: Other Real Property Case Category: Civil - Unlimited J urisdictional Amount: >25000 07/12/2019 NOTICE OF CONFIRMATION OF FILING Case Title: Documents Electronically Filed/Received Status Statement of Decision Accepted Comments Submitter's Comments: Clerk's Comments: Electronic Filing Service Provider Information Service Provider OnelLegal Email: support@ onelegal.com Contact Person: Customer Support Phone: 8009388815 07/12/2019 NOTICE OF CONFIRMATION OF FILING 6/26/2019 One Legal ONE LEGAL Confirmation #: 22779262 Case Title: Millenium Properties Inc. vs. Bisson Thank you for choosing One Legal. If you have any questions about this order, please email us at support@onelegal.com. CASE INFORMATION ORDER DETAILS Court Name: Orange County, Order Type: eFiling Superior Court of California Filing order #: 13421083 Court Branch: Central Justice Center Date/Time Submitted: 6/26/2019 2:24 PM PT Santa Ana Case Title: Millenium Properties Contact Name: Todd Cleary Inc. vs. Bisson Attorney Name: Todd Cleary Case Category: Civil - Unlimited Email Notification: Attorney Case Type: Other Real Property Case #: 30-2017-00919447- CU-OR-CJC DOCUMENTS Document Type Document Title Pages Uploaded Statement of Decision Statement of Decision 4 Copyright © 2019 One Legal LLC » www.onelegal.com https://platform.onelegal.com/OrderReceipt/Index/22779262 1/2 6/26/2019 One Legal Copyright © 2019 One Legal LLC » www.onelegal.com https://platform.onelegal.com/OrderReceipt/Index/22779262 2/2 Exhibit B EXHIBIT B ~N O Y a B A W 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2 28 PROOF OF SERVICE I am employed in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action; my business address is 10720 McCUNE AVENUE, LOS ANGELES, CA 90034 On June 26, 2019, I served the foregoing document described as: DEFENDANT ADAM MUSSAVIR’S [PROPOSED] STATEMENT OF DECISIONS on all interested parties in this action, as follows: THE LAW OFFICE OF ) OSEPH WEST Attorneys for Plaintiff MILLINIUM J osegh A. West, State Bar No. 218847 PROPERTIES, INC. 575 E. Locust Ave., Suite 120 A WYOMING CORPORATION Fresno, CA 93720 westjoseph @earthlink.net Xx ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION: Based on court order -or- agreement of the parties, I caused the foregoing documents to be served electronically to the parties’ email address(es) of record as listed above 1] FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION: Based on court order -or- agreement of the parties, I caused the foregoing documents to be served by transmitting via facsimile machine to the parties’ facsimile number(s) listed above. The facsimile machine I used complied with [_] California Rules of Court, Rule 2003 [_] Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4, and the transmission was reported as complete, without error by a transmission report issued by the transmitting facsimile machine immediately upon completion of transmittal. X BY PLACING [ ] the original [X] a true copy thereof enclosed in sealed envelope(s) to the parties listed above and transmitting via: Xx U.S. MAIL: I caused such envelope(s) to be delivered by first-class mail. I am “readily familiar” with the firm’s practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. It is deposited with the U.S. Postal Service on the same day with postage thereon fully prepaid at Irvine, California in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that on motion of party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than 1 day after date of deposit for mailing in affidavit. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above is true and correct. Executed on June 26, 2019, in the City of Los Angeles, County of Los Angeles, California. ED) odd Cleary _- 4- PROOF OF SERVICE Exhibit C T H el £ 0 0 6 V0 ‘sopeSuy so ONUSAY SUNJON 0ZLOT ; ATes[) *[ PPO, JO O O MET] : ‘bsg ‘Ares[D ‘r ppoL SHEERS 0TLE6 BIUIOJI[ED ‘OUSaI] 0GT 9 g ‘onusAy I s n o o “J SLS 1 9 M 'V ydesop Jo 20130 m e 9 , E R Ll Lr4801HYOB2E ’ $8008 000+ ae IN = Exhibit D SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ORANGE Central Justice Center 700 W. Civic Center Drive Santa Ana, CA 92702 SHORT TITLE: Millenium Properties Inc. vs. Bisson CLERK'S CERTIFICATE OF MAILING/ELECTRONIC CASE NUMBER: SERVICE 30-2017-00919447-CU-OR-CJC I certify that I am not a party to this cause. I certify that the following document(s), Objection dated 07/19/19, Statement of Decision dated 07/19/19, have been transmitted electronically by Orange County Superior Court at Santa Ana, CA. The transmission originated from Orange County Superior Court email address on July 19, 2019, at 11:21:03 AM PDT. The electronically transmitted document(s) is in accordance with rule 2.251 of the California Rules of Court, addressed as shown above. The list of electronically served recipients are listed below: ANDERSON, MCPHARLIN & CONNERS LLP ANDERSON, MCPHARLIN & CONNERS LLP AMC@AMCLAW.COM JSH@AMCLAW.COM ANDERSON, MCPHARLIN & CONNERS LLP LAW OFFICE OF TODD J CLEARY LAC@AMCLAW.COM CLEARY 1@PACBELL.NET THE LAW OFFICE OF JOSEPH WEST WESTJOSEPH@EARTHLINK.NET - > 4 ) Sm CA Ito ar Clerk of the Court, by: vatiy Deputy CLERK'S CERTIFICATE OF MAILING/ELECTRONIC SERVICE V3 1013a (June 2004) Code of Civ. Procedure , § CCP1013(a) 470 E. Herndon Ave. Suite 102 Fresno, CA 93720 Tel.: (310) 478-0890 Ifax: (310) 478-5010 MILLINIUM PROPERTIES INC, a Wyoming Corp. Plaintiff, Vs. THE LAW OFFICE OF JOSEPH WEST Joseph A. West, State Bar No. 218847 Attorneys for Plaintiff: MILLINIUM PROPERTIES INC., a Wyoming Corporation SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF ORANGE FILED SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORMI COUNTY OF ORANGE CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER JUL 19 2019 DAVID H. YAMAS AR, wivin oo Clay ci a DERE CASE NO.: 30-2017-00919447- CU-OR-CJC Action Filed: May 10, 2017 PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTION TO PROPOSED STATEMENT OF DECISION KATHERINE E. BISSON, an individual; ALBERT R. BISSON, an individual; ADAM | MUSAVVIR, an individual; and DOES 1 TO 100 inclusive, Defendants. PLAINTIFL’S OBJECTION TO PROPOSED STATEMENT OF DECISION 7/19/2019 AT&T Yahoo Mail - Superior Court of California, County of Orange - Electronic Service Superior Court of California, County of Orange - Electronic Service From: donotreply@occourts.org (donotreply@occourts.org) To: clearyl@pacbell.net Date: Friday, July 19, 2019, 11:21 AM PDT Please review the information below regarding document(s) that have been electronically transmitted by Orange County Superior Court. To: Law Office of Todd J Cleary From: Superior Court of California, County of Orange Sent: July 19, 2019 at 11:21 AM Case Number: 30-2017-00919447-CU-OR-CIC Case Title: Millenium Properties Inc. vs. Katherine E. Bisson Document: Click here to retrieve your document(s)_ Filing Name: Objection Filing Date: 7/19/19 Filing Party: Millinium Properties Inc. Filing Name: Statement of Decision Filing Date: 7/19/19 Filing Party: Adam Musavvir 17M ~N O Y a B A W 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2 28 PROOF OF SERVICE I am employed in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action; my business address is 10720 McCUNE AVENUE, LOS ANGELES, CA 90034 On July 23, 2019, I served the foregoing document described as: DEFENDANT ADAM MUSSAVIR’S [PROPOSED] STATEMENT OF DECISIONS on all interested parties in this action, as follows: THE LAW OFFICE OF ) OSEPH WEST Attorneys for Plaintiff MILLINIUM J osegh A. West, State Bar No. 218847 PROPERTIES, INC. 575 E. Locust Ave., Suite 120 A WYOMING CORPORATION Fresno, CA 93720 westjoseph @earthlink.net Xx ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION: Based on court order -or- agreement of the parties, I caused the foregoing documents to be served electronically to the parties’ email address(es) of record as listed above 1] FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION: Based on court order -or- agreement of the parties, I caused the foregoing documents to be served by transmitting via facsimile machine to the parties’ facsimile number(s) listed above. The facsimile machine I used complied with [_] California Rules of Court, Rule 2003 [_] Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4, and the transmission was reported as complete, without error by a transmission report issued by the transmitting facsimile machine immediately upon completion of transmittal. X BY PLACING [ ] the original [X] a true copy thereof enclosed in sealed envelope(s) to the parties listed above and transmitting via: Xx U.S. MAIL: I caused such envelope(s) to be delivered by first-class mail. I am “readily familiar” with the firm’s practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. It is deposited with the U.S. Postal Service on the same day with postage thereon fully prepaid at Irvine, California in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that on motion of party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than 1 day after date of deposit for mailing in affidavit. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above is true and correct. Executed on July 23, 2019, in the City of Los Angeles, County of Los Angeles, California. \ ad Zr Todd J Cleary _- 4- PROOF OF SERVICE