What is a Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens?

Useful Rulings on Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens

Recent Rulings on Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens

KESLINKE VS. STROUD

HEARING ON MOTION TO EXPUNGE LIS PENDENS & FOR ATTORNEY FEES FILED BY ALEXANDER P. STROUD * TENTATIVE RULING: * Defendant Stroud’s motion to expunge lis pendens is granted. Last November, the Court granted a similar motion by a similarly situated party to expunge lis pendens. Stroud convincingly argues that the claims now being asserted by plaintiff are virtually identical, and the arguments for expunging the lis pendens are the same as those found valid in November.

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

ROBERTS VS. FAVORS

HEARING ON MOTION TO EXPUNGE LIS PENDENS FILED BY ROSETTA SHATKIN * TENTATIVE RULING: * Defendant Shatkin moves to expunge a lis pendens that plaintiff filed against her property, pointing out that the claims in the complaint are not real estate claims that could support a lis pendens. Plaintiff, in lieu of responding to the motion, has filed a dismissal of Shatkin as a defendant. His papers do not say, however, whether he has done anything to make the lis pendens go away.

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

JOHN MANOS VS WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK, F.A., ET AL.

Res Judicata The Court previously considered the issue of whether Plaintiff’s claims are barred by res judicata in the context of Make It Nice’s motion to expunge an improperly recorded lis pendens. The Court comes to the same conclusion it did in its July 12, 2019, minute order; Plaintiff’s claims are barred by the doctrines of res judicata, collateral estoppel and the rule against claim-splitting.

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

ZIPPRICH V. CASE

There is no proof they were actually recorded, and there is no evidence before the court that the lis pendens have been expunged, as the motion requests. On July 6, 2020, the plaintiffs filed a supplemental brief in support of the motion to expunge. They gave a detailed history of the matter, and indicated that the Orange County Recorder has not, and will not, record the Notices of Withdrawal of the lis pendens.

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2020

AKZAM V. WELLS FARGO HOME MORTGAGE, ET AL.

Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens TENTATIVE RULING Defendant’s unopposed motion to expunge lis pendens is granted. “[O]n a motion to expunge lis pendens after judgment against the claimant and while an appeal is pending, the trial court must grant the motion unless it finds it more likely than not that the appellate court will reverse the judgment.” (Amalgamated Bank v. Superior Court (2007) 149 Cal.App.4th 1003, 1015.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 08, 2020

CLODA JONES VS NAOMI CAMPBELL, ET AL.

.: 19STCV24145 Hearing Date: July 8, 2020 [TENTATIVE] RULING RE: DefendantS NAOMI CAMPBELL AND RONALD CAMPBELL’S Motion for reconsideration of ruling on motion to Expunge Lis Pendens defendants’ attorney susan geffen’s motions to be relieved as counsel Defendants Naomi Campbell and Ronald Campbell’s Motion for Reconsideration of Ruling on Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens is MOOT. Attorney Susan Geffen’s Motions to Be Relieved as Counsel for Defendants Naomi Campbell aka Naomi R. Miller, N.R.

  • Hearing

    Jul 08, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

CLAUDETTE MARIE LESLIE, ET AL. VS NEW CENTURY MORTGAGE CORPORATION, ET AL.

Defendants Mohammad reza Atigehchi and R&M Holding, LLC’s Motion to Expounge Lis Pendens is GRANTED. Plaintiffs are to pay the moving party $1,575 in sanctions. MOTION TO EXPUNGE LIS PENDENS “‘A lis pendens is a recorded document giving constructive notice that an action has been filed affecting title to or right to possession of the real property described in the notice.’ [Citation.] A lis pendens may be filed by any party in an action who asserts a ‘real property claim.’ [Citation.]

  • Hearing

    Jul 07, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Foreclosure

WILLIAM CHARLES JONES JR VS THE REO GROUP INC ET AL

If a party abuses the use of a lis pendens, then a court may expunge the lis pendens. (Kirkeby v. Sup. Ct. (2004) 33 Cal.4th 642, 651.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 02, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

3832 WEST SIXTH STREET LLC VS BOO KON KIM ET AL

Yet the time since the court last ruled on Plaintiffs’ lis pendens notice has not yielded any new facts or evidence favorable to Plaintiff, so the court discerns no advantage to be gained by allowing more time than that already afforded to Plaintiffs. Defendants’ Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens Notice is therefore GRANTED.

  • Hearing

    Jul 01, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

OZRA YAZDANPANAH VS. SHAHNAZ MOKHTARI

On April 11, 2017, plaintiff filed a Notice of Pendency of Action (Lis Pendens), which was recorded on April 10, 2017. On April 13, 2018, the court heard a motion brought by defendant Mokhtari to require an undertaking of plaintiff to maintain the lis pendens. The motion was granted, and the court ordered plaintiff to post an undertaking, setting the bond “at a sum in the amount of $12,500, for carrying costs plus $32,000 for attorneys’ fees, for a total of $44,500.” The bond was posted.

  • Hearing

    Jun 26, 2020

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

ALFREDO ROBLES VS CARLOS ZECENA

Discussion MOTION TO EXPUNGE LIS PENDENS “‘A lis pendens is a recorded document giving constructive notice that an action has been filed affecting title to or right to possession of the real property described in the notice.’ [Citation.] A lis pendens may be filed by any party in an action who asserts a ‘real property claim.’ [Citation.]

  • Hearing

    Jun 24, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

AKIRA KOKUBU VS TAKASHI SUDO, ET AL.

Legal Standard A lis pendens is a recorded document giving constructive notice that an action has been filed affecting title or right to possession of the real property described in the notice. (La Jolla Group II v. Bruce (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 461, 473.) At any time after a lis pendens has been recorded, a property owner may bring a motion to expunge an improperly recorded lis pendens. (CCP § 405.30.) One statutory basis for expunging a lis pendens is the posting of an undertaking.

  • Hearing

    Jun 24, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

GENERAL STREET MEDIA, LLC VS SUNSET HILLS CAR WASH, INC.

On February 11, 2020, Sunset Car Wash, GP (“Sunset GP”) filed the instant Motion for Leave to Intervene and Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens. On March 5, 2020, General filed an Opposition to the instant Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens. General has not filed an Opposition to the Motion for Leave to Intervene. On March 11, 2020, Sunset GP filed a Reply to the Opposition to the Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens and a Notice of Non-Opposition to the Motion for Leave to Intervene.

  • Hearing

    Jun 22, 2020

LUND, EVELYN ET AL VS. HAGEMANN, JENNIFER

The Court continues the June 24, 2020 hearing on Plaintiff's Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens to September 23, 2020 at 9:00 a.m. pending appointment of a Successor-in-Interest.

  • Hearing

    Jun 17, 2020

SRCT HOLDINGS LLC VS US REAL ESTTE CREDIT HOLDINGS III-A, L.P.

A real property owner who is successful in having a lis pendens expunged has a statutory right to attorney’s fees expended in bringing the motion to expunge.

  • Hearing

    Jun 12, 2020

  • Judge Donna Geck
  • County

    Santa Barbara County, CA

RODOLFO BARRIOS BENAVIDES ET AL. VS DAVID MENDEZ ET AL.

The court having read and considered each parties’ motion to enforce the parties’ February 7, 2020 Settlement Agreement and Defendants’ motion to expunge Lis pendens regarding the real property located at 1155 Sweetbriar (“the property”)Manteca, California rules as follows: Plaintiffs’ Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement regarding their individual claimed interest in “the property” filed herein on May 28, 2020 is granted on the following conditions: 1.

  • Hearing

    Jun 11, 2020

  • Judge

    George J. Abdallah

  • County

    San Joaquin County, CA

BENSON III VS. MELENUDO

HEARING ON MOTION TO EXPUNGE LIS PENDENS FILED BY JEFFREY ROSE MELENUDO * TENTATIVE RULING: * Off calendar per stipulation of counsel.

  • Hearing

    Jun 04, 2020

LOVE BUILDERS LLC VS HARRIS DEVELOPMENT LLC

The Motion to expunge Lis Pendens is GRANTED. 3591 Tyco LLC has requested attorney fees pursuant to CCP 405.38, the Court finds that the prevailing party is entitled to attorney fees and costs, however, the requested attorney fees and costs are excessive, the Court GRANTS attorney fees and costs in the amount of $5000.00.

  • Hearing

    Jun 04, 2020

BARBARA EPIS VS. SCOTT C, JOLLEY

Attorney Fee Order On June 13, 2014 the trial court granted Jolley’s motion to expunge the lis pendens Plaintiff had recorded on the Geldert property and awarded Jolley $6,658 in attorney’s fees pursuant to Code Civ. Proc. § 405.38. An order awarding fees upon the grant of a motion to expunge the lis pendens is not appealable and may only be reviewed by a writ of mandate within the time limits imposed by Code Civ. Proc. § 405.39. (Shah v.

  • Hearing

    Jun 02, 2020

BARBARA EPIS VS. SCOTT C. JOLLEY

Attorney Fee Order On June 13, 2014 the trial court granted Jolley’s motion to expunge the lis pendens Plaintiff had recorded on the Geldett property and awarded Jolley $6,658 in attomey’s fees pursuant to Code Civ. Proc. § 405.38, An order awarding fees upon the grant of a motion to expunge the lis pendens is not appealable and may only be reviewed by a writ of mandate within the time limits imposed by Code Civ. Proc. § 405.39, (Shah v.

  • Hearing

    Jun 02, 2020

3832 WEST SIXTH STREET LLC VS BOO KON KIM ET AL

Defendants Boo Kon Ki, and Young Sook Kim’s Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens is GRANTED. Plaintiffs and their counsel are to pay $3,847.95 in fees and costs to Defendants. MOTION TO EXPUNGE LIS PENDENS “‘A lis pendens is a recorded document giving constructive notice that an action has been filed affecting title to or right to possession of the real property described in the notice.’ [Citation.] A lis pendens may be filed by any party in an action who asserts a ‘real property claim.’ [Citation.]

  • Hearing

    Mar 17, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

ABRAHAMS VS. HAMPTON

After filing the FAC, plaintiff recorded a lis pendens on each property. (Motion, 1:26-27.) TRA Lending, now brings a motion to expunge the lis pendens on 2672 Appian Way and 1500 Broadway. These two properties are in different phases of the foreclosure process. Having recorded a notice of default on 1500 Broadway, TRA Lending, LLC, held a foreclosure sale on December 5, 2019, at which it took title to the property. (Askew Declaration, ¶5.)

  • Hearing

    Mar 06, 2020

DEBORAH DAVIS VS MARCIA GOLAN

A lis pendens, on the other hand, is a recorded instrument that gives constructive notice of a pending lawsuit that affects title to real property. (See Gale v. Superior Court (2004) 122 Cal.4th 1388, 1395.) A “real property claim” is a cause of action that would, if meritorious, affect the title or the right to possession to specific property or the use of an easement other than an easement acquired by statute by a regulated public utility. (Code of Civ. Proc., § 405.20.)

  • Hearing

    Mar 04, 2020

  • Type

    Collections

  • Sub Type

    Collections

JEANNIE HUA VS ANTHONY VU NGUYEN, ET AL.

However, the Court finds that the hours expended in relation to the motion to expunge the first lis pendens is excessive especially in light of the experience of Counsel and in light of the simple nature of the motion as Plaintiff had failed to provide the required statutory notice for the lis pendens. (See Order Re: Defendant’s Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens, 8/12/19).

  • Hearing

    Mar 03, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

  • Judge Elaine Lu
  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

WILLIE CARR VS LAKEVIEW LOAN SERVICING LLC, ET AL.

Expunge Lis Pendens Defendant Lakeview Loan Servicing LLC moves to expunge Plaintiff’s lis pendens filed on 7/12/19. When a motion to expunge lis pendens is filed, the burden is on the opposing party to show that the complaint contains allegations of a real-property claim, and to evidence the probable validity of the claim based on a preponderance of evidence. (CCP §§405.32m 405.31; Kirkeby v. Sup. Ct. (2004) 33 Cal.4th 642, 648.)

  • Hearing

    Feb 26, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Foreclosure

  • Judge

    Lori Ann Fournier or Olivia Rosales

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 53     last » 

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

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.