What is a Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens?

Useful Rulings on Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens

Recent Rulings on Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens

ARMANDO GAYTAN VS ADAM GREENFIELD

#Add-On TENTATIVE ORDER Defendant Greenfield’s unopposed motion to expunge lis pendens is DENIED without prejudice. Opposing Party to give NOTICE. Defendant Greenfield moves to expunge lis pendens recorded on 5/29/18 pursuant to CCP § 405.30 et seq. On 11/16/20, Defendant was ordered to give notice “by the end of the Court day today.” (11/16/20 Minute Order.)

  • Hearing

    Dec 01, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

  • Judge

    Lori Ann Fournier or Olivia Rosales

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

MINAKO AMERICA CORP VS. BASSALY #1, LLC

(1) Motion – Other (2) Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens Tentative Ruling: Off Calendar – no hearing will be held. Defendants Bassaly,#1, LLC and Magdy Bassaly’s unopposed Motion to Expunge Mechanic’s Liens and unopposed Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens are GRANTED. Plaintiff failed to establish the probable validity of the claims. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 405.31, 405.32 Howard S. Wright Construction Co. v. Superior Court (2003) 106 Cal.App.4th 314, 314–315.)

  • Hearing

    Dec 01, 2020

MINAKO AMERICA CORP VS. BASSALY #1, LLC

(1) Motion – Other (2) Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens Tentative Ruling: Off Calendar – no hearing will be held. Defendants Bassaly,#1, LLC and Magdy Bassaly’s unopposed Motion to Expunge Mechanic’s Liens and unopposed Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens are GRANTED. Plaintiff failed to establish the probable validity of the claims. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 405.31, 405.32 Howard S. Wright Construction Co. v. Superior Court (2003) 106 Cal.App.4th 314, 314–315.)

  • Hearing

    Dec 01, 2020

SUN V. WU

Based on the above, the court DENIES Defendants’ (Feiwen Wu and Linchun Zhao) Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens (Motion) filed on 7-9-20 under ROA No. 60. Plaintiffs are to give notice.

  • Hearing

    Nov 24, 2020

BRYANT V. FAY SERVICING, LLC

Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens The court grants Defendants Fay Servicing, LLC and U.S.

  • Hearing

    Nov 23, 2020

JENNIFER KUEKES VS. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.,

CIV S-11-1462 KJM) 2011 WL 6097721 at *2 [finding jurisdiction to expunge lis pendens under CCP § 405.30 because otherwise “any person could hypothetically cloud title in perpetuity by maintaining a lis pendens on real property even after the claims upon which the lis pendens is filed have been dismissed and are no longer pending”].)

  • Hearing

    Nov 20, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

JAMES STARTZ VS SPECIALIZED LOAN SERVICING, LLC, ET AL.

Hence, Plaintiff cannot make a showing for any real property interest supporting a lis pendens. Given the lack of any real property interest, no undertaking is required. The motion to expunge the lis pendens is granted.

  • Hearing

    Nov 19, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Foreclosure

HARRIETT E. HAYWOOD VS RTED AMERICA, LLC, ET AL

On January 19, 2018, the court granted RTED America’s motion to expunge lis pendens. On November 6, 2018, the court granted SDS’s motion for summary judgment. On October 18, 2018, the court granted RTED’s motion for summary adjudication as to the 1st, 2nd, and 7th causes of action. On December 18, 2018, the court granted plaintiff’s counsel’s motion to be relieved as counsel. On May 17, 2019, the court entered judgment in favor of defendant Special Default Services.

  • Hearing

    Nov 18, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Foreclosure

HARRIETT E. HAYWOOD VS RTED AMERICA, LLC, ET AL

On January 19, 2018, the court granted RTED America’s motion to expunge lis pendens. On November 6, 2018, the court granted SDS’s motion for summary judgment. On October 18, 2018, the court granted RTED’s motion for summary adjudication as to the 1st, 2nd, and 7th causes of action. On December 18, 2018, the court granted plaintiff’s counsel’s motion to be relieved as counsel. On May 17, 2019, the court entered judgment in favor of defendant Special Default Services.

  • Hearing

    Nov 18, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Foreclosure

17422 DERIAN IRVINE APARTMENTS, LLC VS. A&R CORPORATION, INC.

Although Petitioner asserts that a petition to remove a claim of lien is the same as a motion to expunge a lis pendens, this is not accurate and the authority cited by Petitioner, Lambert v. Superior Court (1991) 228 Cal.App.3d 383, does not support this proposition. Rather, Lambert addresses the process of seeking relief from an unjustified lien claim after foreclosure proceedings have commenced. (See id. at 388.)

  • Hearing

    Nov 16, 2020

OSTOVAR VS SABERI

Defendant further alleges, at page 3: "A motion to expunge a lis pendens may then be filed on any of the following grounds: (1) invalid service of the notice of recordation [Code Civ. Proc. § 405.22]; (2) failure to plead a real property claim [Code Civ. Proc. § 405.31]; (3) failure to establish the probable validity of the real property claim [Code Civ. Proc. § 405.32]; or (4) a showing that adequate relief can be secured to the claimant by giving an undertaking [Code Civ. Proc. § 405.33].

  • Hearing

    Nov 12, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

OSTOVAR VS SABERI

Defendant further alleges, at page 3: "A motion to expunge a lis pendens may then be filed on any of the following grounds: (1) invalid service of the notice of recordation [Code Civ. Proc. § 405.22]; (2) failure to plead a real property claim [Code Civ. Proc. § 405.31]; (3) failure to establish the probable validity of the real property claim [Code Civ. Proc. § 405.32]; or (4) a showing that adequate relief can be secured to the claimant by giving an undertaking [Code Civ. Proc. § 405.33].

  • Hearing

    Nov 12, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

OSTOVAR VS SABERI

Defendant further alleges, at page 3: "A motion to expunge a lis pendens may then be filed on any of the following grounds: (1) invalid service of the notice of recordation [Code Civ. Proc. § 405.22]; (2) failure to plead a real property claim [Code Civ. Proc. § 405.31]; (3) failure to establish the probable validity of the real property claim [Code Civ. Proc. § 405.32]; or (4) a showing that adequate relief can be secured to the claimant by giving an undertaking [Code Civ. Proc. § 405.33].

  • Hearing

    Nov 12, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

DEBRA ANN REID VS GERALD BARNES

On July 29, 2020 Defendant filed this motion to expunge lis pendens, and for attorney’s fees and costs. On August 24, 2020 Defendant filed the declaration of Lola M. McAlpin-Grant, attaching the Remittitur from the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Two, for Appellate Case No. B299274, affirming the judgment in the Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. BC654817.

  • Hearing

    Nov 10, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

LINDA SOFFER VS NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC, ET AL.

Former Defendant Nationstar moves to expunge lis pendens. TENTATIVE RULING: Conditioned on the Court granting former defendant Nationstar Mortgage LLC leave to intervene, the motion to expunge lis pendens will be GRANTED. DISCUSSION: Motion To Expunge Lis Pendens Non-Party Movant The movant, Nationstar Mortgage LLC, was dismissed from this lawsuit on November 7, 2020 – before it filed this motion on October 14, 2020.

  • Hearing

    Nov 09, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

ROSA HERRERA VS JOSE ONTIVEROS JR, ET AL.

Conclusion Based on the foregoing, Defendant’s Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens is DENIED. Moving party to give notice.

  • Hearing

    Nov 06, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

PAXTON COMPANY COOPERATIVE INC. VS SEHYOUNG KIM, ET AL.

The motion is granted.[1] Plaintiff’s Request to File Another Lis Pendens Plaintiff asks the court for leave to record another lis pendens if the court were to expunge the currently recorded lis pendens. Plaintiff, however, has not provided the court with any evidentiary basis for recording another lis pendens. That request is denied.

  • Hearing

    Nov 06, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

NICOLE MAYS VS MORTGAGE MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS, INC., ET AL.

Plaintiff recorded a lis pendens on August 15, 2019. Counsel substituted into the case for Plaintiff on October 15, 2019. On January 2, 2019, plaintiff dismissed the prior lis pendens and filed a new lis pendens. On January 29, 2020, the court granted the motion of Magnum Property Investments, LLC to expunge the lis pendens. Meanwhile, on January 14, 2020, the parties executed a stipulation for the filing of a first amended complaint.

  • Hearing

    Nov 05, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

MACHADO VS. MYERS

RULING ON MOTION TO EXPUNGE LIS PENDENS The Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens brought by defendants Bryan and Jackie Myers (collectively, Defendants or the Myers Family) is continued to Friday, January 15, 2021 at 1:30 p.m. in Department N-31. The Myers-Defendants appear to be arguing that this action is no longer "pending." But, as set forth above, judgment has not yet been entered since this case came back on remittitur from the Court of Appeal.

  • Hearing

    Nov 05, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

FOX VS MARKETORDER FINANCIAL SERVICES INC

Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens Intervenors Brian Adolfo Nava and Diana L. Gonzalez bring this motion to expunge the notice of lis pendens recorded by plaintiffs. This motion is brought on procedural grounds and on the ground that the complaint does not allege a real property claim. Regardless of the procedural grounds, failure to allege a real property claim is fatal to maintaining a lis pendens. Intervenors' request for judicial notice is granted.

  • Hearing

    Nov 05, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

MACHADO VS. MYERS

RULING ON MOTION TO EXPUNGE LIS PENDENS The Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens brought by defendants Bryan and Jackie Myers (collectively, Defendants or the Myers Family) is continued to Friday, January 15, 2021 at 1:30 p.m. in Department N-31. The Myers-Defendants appear to be arguing that this action is no longer "pending." But, as set forth above, judgment has not yet been entered since this case came back on remittitur from the Court of Appeal.

  • Hearing

    Nov 05, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

FOX VS MARKETORDER FINANCIAL SERVICES INC

Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens Intervenors Brian Adolfo Nava and Diana L. Gonzalez bring this motion to expunge the notice of lis pendens recorded by plaintiffs. This motion is brought on procedural grounds and on the ground that the complaint does not allege a real property claim. Regardless of the procedural grounds, failure to allege a real property claim is fatal to maintaining a lis pendens. Intervenors' request for judicial notice is granted.

  • Hearing

    Nov 05, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

DONALD V. RYAN ET AL. VS A. ROSSI, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION

The Declaration of Toinette Rossi in Support of Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens filed in this case, (Exhibit E); 6. The Stipulation and Consent Order #2003-59 (Redacted), United States Department of the Treasury, May 23, 2003, (Exhibit F); 7. The Declaration of John Eppers filed by Defendant in support of its Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens, dated November 5, 2019, (Exhibit G); and 8.

  • Hearing

    Nov 05, 2020

  • Judge

    George J. Abdallah

  • County

    San Joaquin County, CA

MOHAMMADI VS EFTEKARI

As such, the Court declines to order the lis pendens expunged on this ground. Merits of Motion – Whether Plaintiffs Can Establish That Their Real Property Claim Has Probable Validity Defendant Eftekari moves to expunge the lis pendens under Code Civ. Proc. § 405.32, which reads as follows: Code Civ.

  • Hearing

    Nov 05, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

CADENCE ACQUISITIONS LLC VS. SAID RAFEH

LEGAL STANDARD A motion to expunge a lis pendens may be brought by any person with an interest in the property subject to the lis pendens, and on the grounds set forth in §§405.31 and 405.32. (See Code of Civil Procedure §405.30.) On a motion to expunge lis pendens pursuant to §405.31 405.32, the party who recorded the lis pendens bears the burden of proof.

  • Hearing

    Nov 04, 2020

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 58     last » 

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

Please wait a moment while we load this page.