What is a breach of fiduciary duty?

Useful Rulings on Professional Negligence – Breach of Fiduciary Duty

Recent Rulings on Professional Negligence – Breach of Fiduciary Duty

176-200 of 783 results

JEE YONG SHIN ET AL VS HILTON & HYLAND REAL ESTATE ET AL

On November 13, 2017, Shin/Shinn filed a First Amended Complaint (“Shin/Shinn FAC”) against Defendants for (1) professional negligence, (2) breach of fiduciary duty, and (3) unauthorized practice of law (Bus. & Prof. Code § 6125, et seq.). B. Hansen Action On July 25, 2018, Plaintiffs Christopher Hansen and Deanna Hansen (“Hansens”) filed a complaint against Defendants.

  • Hearing

    Jul 08, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

RONALD AULD VS VALLEY PRESBYTERIAN HOSPITAL

BACKGROUND On February 22, 2019, Plaintiff Ronald Auld (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Defendant Valley Presbyterian Hospital (“Defendant”) alleging negligence, negligence Yuriy Verpukovsky, negligence per se, breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, relief, and intentional infliction of emotional distress for injuries sustained from pieces of an IV needle being left in Plaintiff’s arm on February 27, 2017.

  • Hearing

    Jul 08, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

HOSSEIN FATEHMANESH VS DAVID LALLY

of fiduciary duty.

  • Hearing

    Jul 02, 2019

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

  • Judge Elaine Lu
  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

ROSEMARY PERERA ET AL VS LINCOLN BENEFIT LIFE COMPANY ET AL

The operative Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) asserts causes of action for (1) negligent misrepresentation, (2) professional negligence, (3) breach of fiduciary duty, (4) quasi-contract, and (5) financial elder abuse.

  • Hearing

    Jul 02, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

LISA BOREL VS CONGRESS MEDICAL ASSOCIATES INC ET AL

The First Amended Complaint (“FAC”), filed June 20, 2018, alleges causes of action for: (1) Willful Misconduct; (2) Negligence; (3) Fraudulent Concealment; (4) Constructive Fraud; (5) Breach of Fiduciary Duty; (6) Medical Battery; and (7) Lack of Informed Consent. PRESENTATION: The instant motion requesting that Plaintiff post an undertaking was filed on May 31, 2019, by Defendants Congress Medical Associates, Inc. d/b/a Congress Orthopaedic Associates, Inc.; and William Costigan, M.D.

  • Hearing

    Jun 28, 2019

BIC D. PHO V. ERIC J. SIDEBOTHAM, ET AL.

(e)] for breach of fiduciary duty is OVERRULED. B. Defendants’ demurrer to the second cause of action in plaintiff Pho’s FAC [professional negligence] is OVERRULED.

  • Hearing

    Jun 20, 2019

  • Judge

    Presiding

  • County

    Santa Clara County, CA

ROSEMARY PERERA ET AL VS LINCOLN BENEFIT LIFE COMPANY ET AL

The operative Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) asserts causes of action for (1) negligent misrepresentation, (2) professional negligence, (3) breach of fiduciary duty, (4) quasi-contract, and (5) financial elder abuse.

  • Hearing

    Jun 20, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

GEORGE DANIELS V. RALPH I. GUNTHER, ET AL.

Similarly, the Realtors argue that Gunther’s third cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty is also a masked indemnity claim. This cause of action is again based on the sale that is the subject of Plaintiff’s complaint, and Gunther wholly fails to allege any damages he suffered as a result of the alleged breach.

  • Hearing

    Jun 19, 2019

YUWANDA SAMANUKORN, ET AL VS. JPCL DEVELOPMENT LLC, ET AL

The complaint, filed March 14, 2018, alleges causes of action for: (1) fraud and deceit; (2) negligent misrepresentation; (3) constructive fraud; (4) breach of statutory duty; (5) breach of fiduciary duty; (6) breach of contract; (7) professional negligence; (8) negligent misrepresentation; (9) professional negligence; and (10) breach of implied covenant against encumbrances.

  • Hearing

    Jun 14, 2019

BARU VS KASED

The Complaint alleges (1) Unfair Business Practices; (2) Breach of Fiduciary Duty; (3) Professional Negligence; (4) Conversion; (5) Fraud; (6) Negligent Misrepresentation; and (7) Rescission. Plaintiff seeks punitive damages. The Complaint also pleads a class action. Sufficiency of Class Allegations Defendants do not argue the merits of the essential claim of whether the "true retainer" provision was lawful. Defendants only demur to the class allegations.

  • Hearing

    Jun 13, 2019

  • Type

    Business

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

WEI-LING JEN VS. LINDA LAU

As a result of Defendants’ conduct, Plaintiff filed the instant action alleging two causes of action sounding in (1) Legal Malpractice, and (2) Breach of Fiduciary Duty.

  • Hearing

    Jun 07, 2019

ANDREA GALANTE VS JOSHUA M FINE ET AL

First and Third Causes of Action: Professional Negligence & Breach of Fiduciary Duty Defendants assert that “[w]ith respect to Defendant Baron, the SAC remains bereft of allegations that he was an attorney or legal representative of Plaintiff and does not sufficiently allege that Baron’s involvement resulted in damages to Plaintiff,” thus “the punitive damages claims for professional negligence and breach of fiduciary duty must be stricken, at least with respect to Baron.” (Motion, pp. 1:21-23, 2:12-13.)

  • Hearing

    Jun 04, 2019

ST JON VS MARTORELL

The Complaint does not sufficiently allege the date(s) on which Plaintiff discovered any alleged professional negligence or breach of fiduciary duty by Defendants. Accordingly, neither Defendants nor the court are able to determine whether Plaintiff's claims are time-barred and the complaint fails for uncertainty. (Code Civ. Proc. § 430.10(f).) Plaintiff may have until June 21, 2019 to file a First Amended Complaint.

  • Hearing

    May 30, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

NATALIE FLETES VS GEORGE M. HALIMI

Professional Negligence, 2. Breach of Fiduciary Duty, and 3. Breach of Contract. A previous demurrer (12/14/18) was sustained with leave to amend. Defendant demurs and moves to strike as to the FAC. First Cause of Action for Professional Negligence Previously, the court ruled plaintiff stated a claim for professional negligence, but her claim appeared to be barred by the statute of limitations. 12/14/18 Minute Order, pg. 3. The court granted leave to amend. Id.

  • Hearing

    May 30, 2019

ST JON VS MARTORELL

The Complaint does not sufficiently allege the date(s) on which Plaintiff discovered any alleged professional negligence or breach of fiduciary duty by Defendants. Accordingly, neither Defendants nor the court are able to determine whether Plaintiff's claims are time-barred and the complaint fails for uncertainty. (Code Civ. Proc. § 430.10(f).) Plaintiff may have until June 21, 2019 to file a First Amended Complaint.

  • Hearing

    May 30, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

IRENE LOPEZ, ET AL. VS. BONAVENTURA REALTY, INC., ET AL.

.; (10) Breach of fiduciary duty; and (11) Breach of statutory escrow duties Lopez now moves for leave to file a First Amended Complaint (“FAC”). The motion is unopposed. For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants the motion. II. Standard Code of Civil Procedure §§ 473(a)(1) and 576 provide courts with the authority to allow the amendment of pleadings upon a showing of good cause and the absence of prejudice.

  • Hearing

    May 28, 2019

  • Judge

    Maurice A. Leiter or Salvatore Sirna

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

FILIPPINI WEALTH MANAGEMENT INC ET AL VS MEISTER & NUNES PC

(“Meister”), alleging causes of action for (1) professional negligence, (2) breach of fiduciary duty, (3) constructive fraud, and (4) violation of B&P Code §§ 17200, et seq. On February 25, 2019, Meister filed a demurrer and motion to strike. In the demurrer, Meister contended that the complaint fails to allege any factual allegations to support the claims that Meister acted wrongfully, or to support the claims of damage. Meister moved to strike the claim for attorneys’ fees.

  • Hearing

    May 24, 2019

  • Judge Donna Geck
  • County

    Santa Barbara County, CA

CADRIN E GILL ET AL VS LAW OFFICES OF SPOTORA & ASSOCIATES

Friedman (2006) 142 Cal.App.4th 1518, 1534-1535, a cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty is distinct from a cause of action for professional negligence. Here, Plaintiffs have failed to allege facts that would support a cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty. Accordingly, the Court sustains the demurrer to the third cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty.

  • Hearing

    May 24, 2019

  • Judge Elaine Lu
  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

LOUIS MAYORGA VS EVAN S. COHEN, ET AL.

.: 18STCV01064 Hearing Date: March 23, 2019 [TENTATIVE] order RE: Defendants’ motion to stay action BACKGROUND This action arises from alleged legal malpractice and breach of fiduciary duty that occurred in the course of negotiating a settlement agreement for a prior litigation involving copyright royalties for music. In the complaint, plaintiff Louis Mayorga (“Plaintiff”) alleges that he was represented by attorney Evan S. Cohen in the prior litigation entitled, Louis Mayorga v.

  • Hearing

    May 23, 2019

  • Judge Elaine Lu
  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

EVANS VS TAHVILDARI

There are sufficient facts alleged to support damages in the breach of fiduciary duty and professional negligence causes of action. "A person who through the tort of another has been required to act in the protection of his interests by bringing or defending an action against a third person is entitled to recover compensation for the reasonably necessary loss of time, attorney's fees, and other expenditures thereby suffered or incurred." Prentice v. North Am.

  • Hearing

    May 23, 2019

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

MICHELLE JENKINS VS XING YUN WANG, ET AL.

Kellogg & Andelson (1999) 73 Cal.App.4th 492, 503 (holding the same with respect to breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, and breach of contract claims).) The Court agrees with the Avedon Defendants that the gravamen of this action against them is accounting malpractice.

  • Hearing

    May 22, 2019

YUWANDA SAMANUKORN, ET AL VS. JPCL DEVELOPMENT LLC, ET AL

The complaint, filed March 14, 2018, alleges causes of action for: (1) fraud and deceit; (2) negligent misrepresentation; (3) constructive fraud; (4) breach of statutory duty; (5) breach of fiduciary duty; (6) breach of contract; (7) professional negligence; (8) negligent misrepresentation; (9) professional negligence; and (10) breach of implied covenant against encumbrances.

  • Hearing

    May 17, 2019

ERIC S BARTON ET AL VS RODNEY R RICE III ET AL

.; Promissory Fraud; Promissory Fraud; Breach of Fiduciary Duty; Conversion; Fraud; Fraud; Professional Negligence; Professional Negligence; Negligence; Negligence; Negligent Misrepresentation; Negligent Misrepresentation; Spoliation of Evidence; Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress; Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress; and Accounting. On September 22, 2017, this court denied Roberson’s Motion to Quash Service of Summons and Complaint.

  • Hearing

    May 14, 2019

NESBIT VS LOWELL

These allegations are sufficient to state a breach of fiduciary duty claim. 3rd COA – Professional Negligence The allegations, as already detailed, are also sufficient to state a professional negligence claim against Ms. Kogler and SCCE. As to Mr. Murphy and First Team, they do not cite any law in support of their argument that they owed plaintiffs no professional duty in the transaction. As a result, the court is inclined to overrule all demurrers to the 2AC.

  • Hearing

    May 13, 2019

ANDREW WELCH VS JEFFREY CHRISTOPHER CHANEY..., ET AL

., Rockland Realty Services, and Beach Guys Development LLC for (1) fraud and deceit, (2) intentional nondisclosure of material facts, (3) breach of fiduciary duty, (4) constructive fraud, (5) dissolution of the LLC, (6) accounting, (7) declaratory relief, (8) quiet title, (9) injunctive relief, and (10) professional negligence. Plaintiff alleges that on June 25, 2013, plaintiff and Chaney entered into a written operating agreement for the formation and operation of the LLC.

  • Hearing

    May 10, 2019

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

  « first    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 32     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.