What is slander/disparagement of title?

Useful Resources for Slander or Disparagement of Title

Recent Rulings on Slander or Disparagement of Title

201-225 of 1890 results

RICK ALVARADO VS CITY OF SIERRA MADRE ET AL

The operative fourth amended complaint (“4AC”) alleges the following four causes of action: (1) intentional violation of Labor Code §§ 1050, 1054; (2) defamation – slander per se; and (3) intentional interference with prospective economic relations.

  • Hearing

    Jul 29, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

31537 ANACAPA VIEW DR., LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, ALSO KNOWN AS 31537 ANACAPA VIEW DRIVE, LLC VS BLW ASSOCIATES, LP, ET AL.

., LLC commenced this action against BLW Associates, LP, Equity Trust Company, Custodian FBO Barry Weiner IRA, North American Title Company, William Elliott Westwood aka Bill Westwood, Remington Chase, Tolbex Inc. and for (1) slander of title; (2) cancellation of instruments and removal of cloud on title; (3) declaratory relief; (4) fraud; (5) money had and received; (6) conversion; and (7) unjust enrichment.

  • Hearing

    Jul 29, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

AVIS COPELIN, REAL PARTY IN INTEREST, ET AL. VS REHABBERS FINANCIAL INC, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

procedural history Plaintiffs filed the Complaint on April 8, 2019, alleging nine causes of action: Unlicensed Activity Set Aside Foreclosure Sales Breach of Written Contracts Slander of Title Cancel Trustee’s Deeds Quiet Title Accounting Unlawful Self-Help Lockout Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress On April 24, 2019, this Court denied Plaintiffs’ Ex Parte Application for Injunctive Relief.

  • Hearing

    Jul 28, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

JANE DOE VS JABARI SHELTON ET AL

On July 13, 2018, Defendant/Cross-Complainant Shelton filed a cross-complaint against Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant Doe and Cross-Defendants Paul Barresi (“Barresi”) and Roes 1 through 10 for: (1) slander; (2) civil extortion; and (3) intentional infliction of emotional distress. Shelton alleged in the Cross-Complaint that he did not commit misconduct.

  • Hearing

    Jul 28, 2020

  • Judge Elaine Lu
  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

NATASHA ROBINSON ET AL VS PASEO DORENA OWNERS ASSOCIATION ET

The court overruled the demurrer to the defamation, defamation per se, and slander causes of action. The court granted the motion to strike the punitive damage allegations in all causes of action not rendered moot by the demurrer.

  • Hearing

    Jul 28, 2020

JUAN R. NUNGARAY VS BANK OF AMERICA, NA, ET AL.

Provost (1994) 26 Cal.App.4th 1703, 1707.) 4th Cause of Action: Slander of Title Plaintiff cannot allege a slander of title claim based on the recording of the notice of default, notice of sale, and TDUS. Performance of statutorily required actions prior to a foreclosure are privileged communications. (Kahlon v.

  • Hearing

    Jul 27, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Foreclosure

SMART PAWN, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY VS SHIPPEE'S PROPERTIES, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY

procedural history Plaintiffs filed the Complaint on April 8, 2019, alleging nine causes of action: Unlicensed Activity Set Aside Foreclosure Sales Breach of Written Contracts Slander of Title Cancel Trustee’s Deeds Quiet Title Accounting Unlawful Self-Help Lockout Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress On April 24, 2019, this Court denied Plaintiffs’ Ex Parte Application for Injunctive Relief.

  • Hearing

    Jul 27, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

ETHEL MATTHEWS VS RESMAE MORTGAGE CORPORATION, ET AL.

Slander of Title (3rd COA) – MERS, SPS, STGC, & QLS A cause of action for slander of title requires the following elements: (1) publication; (2) falsity; (3) absence of privilege; and (4) disparagement of another’s land which is relied upon by a third party and which results in a pecuniary loss. Appel v. Burman (1984) 159 Cal.App.3d 1209, 1214. Plaintiff failed to allege sufficient facts to constitute a cause of action for slander of title.

  • Hearing

    Jul 27, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

(NO CASE NAME AVAILABLE)

procedural history Plaintiffs filed the Complaint on April 8, 2019, alleging nine causes of action: Unlicensed Activity Set Aside Foreclosure Sales Breach of Written Contracts Slander of Title Cancel Trustee’s Deeds Quiet Title Accounting Unlawful Self-Help Lockout Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress On April 24, 2019, this Court denied Plaintiffs’ Ex Parte Application for Injunctive Relief.

  • Hearing

    Jul 27, 2020

BACLET VS BACLET

Slander of Title: CACI No. 1730 states that to prove slander of title, the plaintiff must show: (1) defendant made a statement or other act, e.g., recorded a deed, that cast doubts about plaintiff’s ownership of the property; (2) that the statement was made to a person other than plaintiff, e.g., deed became a public record; (3) that the statement was untrue and plaintiff did in fact own the property; (4) that defendant knew that or acted with reckless disregard of the truth or falsity as to whether plaintiff

  • Hearing

    Jul 27, 2020

HOMAYOUN LARIAN VS EDWARD CZUKER, ET AL.

Fourth Cause of Action: Slander of Title “Slander of title is effected by one who without privilege publishes untrue and disparaging statements with respect to the property of another under such circumstances as would lead a reasonable person to foresee that a prospective purchaser or lessee thereof might abandon his intentions. It is an invasion of the interest in the vendibility of property. . . . Damages usually consist of loss of a prospective purchaser.” (Phillips v.

  • Hearing

    Jul 26, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

HOME FROM HOME HAYNES, LLC, ET AL. VS GREEN MOVEMENT BUILDERS, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

On June 3, 2020, Plaintiffs filed their 14 cause of action complaint for Invasion of Privacy (False Light), Defamation (Per Se and Per Quod – Libel and Slander), Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress, Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress, Trade Libel, Civil Harassment, Intentional Interference with Contractual Relations, Wrongful Eviction, Forcible Entry, Quiet Title, Declaratory Relief, Intentional Misrepresentation, Conversion, and Trespass to Chattels.

  • Hearing

    Jul 24, 2020

CITY OF MONROVIA VS PAULINE WHITE, ET AL

l1) Selective Enforcement l2) Void for Vagueness/Overbroad 13) Chill Public Participation and Free Speech 14) Slander of Title 15) Taking 16) Trespass 17) Contracts Clause 18) Estoppel, Laches, Unclean Hands 19) Improper Tax, Violation of Prop. 26 20) Accord and Satisfaction 21) Emotional Distress and Loss of Income RELIEF REQUESTED: Demurrer to each cause of action Strike Cross-Complaint under CCP section 425.16.

  • Hearing

    Jul 24, 2020

LUTTEROTH VS PAULA

The Motion is denied as to the claims against the Lutteroths for slander per se and the claims against Rodriquez for slander per se. Joinder by cross-defendant Arturo Rodriquez is GRANTED. (See, Barak v. The Quisenberry Law Firm (2006) 135 Cal.App.4th 654, 661) However, Mr. Rodriquez did not present any argument that the alleged statements made by him were made in contemplation of litigation as argued by the Lutteroths. Thus, he has not shown that SLAPP applies to his claims.

  • Hearing

    Jul 23, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

LUTTEROTH VS PAULA

The Motion is denied as to the claims against the Lutteroths for slander per se and the claims against Rodriquez for slander per se. Joinder by cross-defendant Arturo Rodriquez is GRANTED. (See, Barak v. The Quisenberry Law Firm (2006) 135 Cal.App.4th 654, 661) However, Mr. Rodriquez did not present any argument that the alleged statements made by him were made in contemplation of litigation as argued by the Lutteroths. Thus, he has not shown that SLAPP applies to his claims.

  • Hearing

    Jul 23, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

LUTTEROTH VS PAULA

The Motion is denied as to the claims against the Lutteroths for slander per se and the claims against Rodriquez for slander per se. Joinder by cross-defendant Arturo Rodriquez is GRANTED. (See, Barak v. The Quisenberry Law Firm (2006) 135 Cal.App.4th 654, 661) However, Mr. Rodriquez did not present any argument that the alleged statements made by him were made in contemplation of litigation as argued by the Lutteroths. Thus, he has not shown that SLAPP applies to his claims.

  • Hearing

    Jul 23, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

LUTTEROTH VS PAULA

The Motion is denied as to the claims against the Lutteroths for slander per se and the claims against Rodriquez for slander per se. Joinder by cross-defendant Arturo Rodriquez is GRANTED. (See, Barak v. The Quisenberry Law Firm (2006) 135 Cal.App.4th 654, 661) However, Mr. Rodriquez did not present any argument that the alleged statements made by him were made in contemplation of litigation as argued by the Lutteroths. Thus, he has not shown that SLAPP applies to his claims.

  • Hearing

    Jul 23, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

AASIR AZZARMI VS WENDY CHAU, ET AL.

Relihan, Clifford Schwenker, Hana Bruce, Kristina Keifer, Jazzmaine Francis, Susan Judson, Christ Catania, and Charlotte Ling for (1) defamation-libel, (2) defamation-libel per se, (3) defamation-slander, (4) defamation-slander per se, (5) defamation at common law and pursuant to Civil Code §46, (6) IIED, (7) trade libel, (8) violation of Bus. & Prof.

  • Hearing

    Jul 22, 2020

STUART LEE ZUBRICK VS SAHIBZADA AASIM AKHTAR

Plaintiff filed the operative Third Amended Complaint (“TAC”) alleging causes of action for: (1)-(2) quiet title; (3)-(4) slander of title; (5) breach of fiduciary duty; (6) intentional interference with contractual relations; (7) accounting; and (8) conversion.

  • Hearing

    Jul 22, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

CONDOR MANAGEMENT, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY VS REDIGER INVESTMENT MORTGAGE FUND, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP, ET AL.

On April 27, 2020, Plaintiff filed the operative First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) against Defendants alleging causes of action for: (1) slander of title; (2) cancellation of written instrument; (3) California Penal Code, Section 496; and (4) declaratory relief with request for temporary, preliminary, and permanent injunctive relief.

  • Hearing

    Jul 21, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

(NO CASE NAME AVAILABLE)

Slander 8. Failure to Pay wages 9. Conversion (voluntary dismissal filed on October 3, 2019) 10. Unfair Business Practices 11. Declaratory Relief 12. Accounting Plaintiff filed his original complaint on 8/08/19. On 12/12/19, the Court heard Defendant’s demurrer to the fifth and sixth causes of action. The Court sustained the demurrer with leave to amend, finding the allegations amounted to mere conclusions, which were insufficient to support a claim for misrepresentation.

  • Hearing

    Jul 21, 2020

ANDREW KIRK VS ROYAL PALMS APARTMENTS, INC., A CALIFORNIA NONPROFIT MUTUAL BENEFIT CORPORATION (C0308381), ET AL.

Yang, Ted Tuggle, Marla Fernandez, Erin Copenbarger, and Jahleel Wilson for slander of title and breach of fiduciary duty. The crux of the complaint is that Defendants improperly attempted to convert the complex in which Plaintiff resides from a stock cooperative to a condominium complex.

  • Hearing

    Jul 21, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

JOSE R SOLANO VS MAGNUM PROPERTIES INVESTMENTS LLC

Slander of Title (7th COA) The elements of a cause of action for slander of title are “(1) a publication, (2) which is without privilege or justification, (3) which is false, and (4) which causes direct and immediate pecuniary loss.” (Manhattan Loft, LLC v. Mercury Liquors, Inc. (2009) 173 Cal.App.4th 1040, 1051.) Plaintiff failed to allege facts to establish a cause of action for slander of title.

  • Hearing

    Jul 20, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

PAT ROY VS INGLEWOOD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT ET AL

Discussion First Cause of Action: Slander Per Se Defendants contend that the first cause of action for slander per se fails because (1) the defamatory statements are privileged under Civil Code section 47(b), (2) the statements are privileged under Civil Code section 47(c), (3) and the statements are true. “Defamation is an invasion of the interest in reputation.

  • Hearing

    Jul 17, 2020

  • Judge Elaine Lu
  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

CYNTHIA MARIA RIBAS VS BEAU MONDE ASSOCIATION, ET AL.

Ribas (Plaintiff) filed suit against Defendant Beau Monde Association and Sommer Adel Salam (Defendant Rodriguez), alleging: (1) breach of contract; (2) breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, (3) libel per se, (4) slander per se, (5) fraud (false promise), (6) negligent misrepresentation, and (7) breach of fiduciary duty.

  • Hearing

    Jul 17, 2020

  « first    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 76     last » 

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

Please wait a moment while we load this page.