On October 09, 2019 a
Complaint,Petition
was filed
involving a dispute between
Rancho Del Chino, Llc,
and
A&B Chino Hotels, Llc,
A&B Hotel Management Investment, Inc.,
Does 2 To 20,
Js Hotel Development, Inc.,
Maa Byu Hospitality, Llc,
Maa Byu Hospitality Llc,
Maru, Bharat "Brett",
Rancho Del Chino North, Llc,
for Other Civil Contracts
in the District Court of San Bernardino County.
Preview
1 JASON P SACCUZZO
D5 uzzoia v v lilaw ca
Bar No 221837
1
SCou y o ro
SAN yEq sAN F
BERNqRD1Np
2 USTIN A PINDER Bar No 326056
dpinder vivolilaw com
V
NAR iNp v p SpN
3 VIVOLI SACCUZZO LLP 5 OZ
3104 Fourth Avenue
4
San Diego California 92103
619 744 9992 Tel
5
6l9 744 9994 Fax
6
Attorneys for Plaintiff
RANCHO DEL CHINO LLC
8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9 COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO SAN BERNARDINO DISTRICT
10
RANCHO DEL CHINO LLC a California CASE NO CIVDS1929675
11 limited liability company
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR
12
Plaintiff
1 BREACH OF RESTRICTION AND
13
vs EASEMENT AGREEMENT
14 2 COMMON COUNTS
A B HOTEL MANAGEMENT
15
INVESTMENT INC a California corporation
MAA BYU HOSPITALITY LLC DOE 1 and
16
DOES 2 20 inclusive
17
Defendant
1g
9
20 Plaintiff Rancho Del Chino LLC Plaintiff alleges as follows
21 l Plaintiff is and at all relevant times herein was a limited liability company duly
22 formed and existing under the laws of the State of California and at all relevant times maintained
23 its primary place of business in the County of Los Angeles
24 2 Plaintiff is informed and believes and based thereon alleges that Defendant A B
25 Hotel Management Investment Ina A B is a California corporation doing business as a real
2C estate investment and management company under the management and control of DOES 2 20
27 3 Plaintiff is informed and believes and based thereon alleges that Defendant MAA
28 BYU Hospitality LLC MAA previously named as DOE 1 is an affiliate of A B and that
i
F1RST AMENDED COMPLAINT
1 A B and DOES 2 20 caused MAA to take title to a parcel of property within the subject property
2 in question from another entity affiliated with A B JS Hotel Development Inc JS on or
3 about December 19 2019
4 4 The true identities and individual partnership and or corporate status of DOES 2
5 through 20 are currently unknown to Plaintiff who therefore sues such Defendants in such
6 fictitious capacities until such time as Plaintiff discovers each such Defendants true names and
7 identities as well as the specific conduct committed by such Defendants as against Plaintiff At
8 such time as Plaintiff discovers the true names and identities of each such DOE Defendants
9 Plaintiff will amend by DOE amendment and or will seek leave to amend this First Amended
10 Complaint and substitute the true names for the fictitious identities sued hereupon
11 5 Plaintiff is informed and believes and based thereon alleges that Defendants A B
12 MAA and DOES 2 20 are parent subsidiary entities sister companies or the alter egos of an
13 individual and A B MAA and DOES 2 20 collectively Defendants are all part of a single
14 enterprise Real property records reflect that the entity JS which Plaintiff is informed and believes
15 was also under the control of DOES 2 20 transferred a parcel of property within the subject
16 property to MAA after Plaintiff made demand for payment as alleged in Plaintif s original
17 Complaint Available corporate records reflect that JS was dissolved on or about May 11 2020
18 with the same individual signing all relevant documents concerning the property transfer by JS to
19 MAA and the dissolution of JS Moreover Plaintiff is informed and believes that A B and MAA
20 are entities specifically formed and maintained for purposes of limiting the personal exposure of
21 A B and DOES 2 20 and that these entities and persons routinely commingles the assets of these
22 alter ego entities in complete disregard of their purported separate identities Plaintiff is further
23 informed and believes and hereby alleges that A B and MAA are fraudulent and or improperly
24 maintained solely to defraud persons such as Plaintiff as creditors and that such entities must be
25 disregarded pursuant to the doctrine of piercing the corporate veil By virtue of application of
26 this doctrine and because an inequitable result would follow any failure to hold all such
27 Defendants jointly and severally responsible for the damages complained of herein all Defendants
28 named herein are jointly and severally liable for each and all of Plaintiff s injuries as the alter ego
2
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
Document Filed Date
June 05, 2020
Case Filing Date
October 09, 2019
Category
Other Civil Contracts
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
1 JASON P SACCUZZO D5 uzzoia v v lilaw ca Bar No 221837 1 SCou y o ro SAN yEq sAN F BERNqRD1Np 2 USTIN A PINDER Bar No 326056 dpinder vivolilaw com V NAR iNp v p SpN 3 VIVOLI SACCUZZO LLP 5 OZ 3104 Fourth Avenue 4 San Diego California 92103 619 744 9992 Tel 5 6l9 744 9994 Fax 6 Attorneys for Plaintiff RANCHO DEL CHINO LLC 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO SAN BERNARDINO DISTRICT 10 RANCHO DEL CHINO LLC a California CASE NO CIVDS1929675 11 limited liability company FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR 12 Plaintiff 1 BREACH OF RESTRICTION AND 13 vs EASEMENT AGREEMENT 14 2 COMMON COUNTS A B HOTEL MANAGEMENT 15 INVESTMENT INC a California corporation MAA BYU HOSPITALITY LLC DOE 1 and 16 DOES 2 20 inclusive 17 Defendant 1g 9 20 Plaintiff Rancho Del Chino LLC Plaintiff alleges as follows 21 l Plaintiff is and at all relevant times herein was a limited liability company duly 22 formed and existing under the laws of the State of California and at all relevant times maintained 23 its primary place of business in the County of Los Angeles 24 2 Plaintiff is informed and believes and based thereon alleges that Defendant A B 25 Hotel Management Investment Ina A B is a California corporation doing business as a real 2C estate investment and management company under the management and control of DOES 2 20 27 3 Plaintiff is informed and believes and based thereon alleges that Defendant MAA 28 BYU Hospitality LLC MAA previously named as DOE 1 is an affiliate of A B and that i F1RST AMENDED COMPLAINT 1 A B and DOES 2 20 caused MAA to take title to a parcel of property within the subject property 2 in question from another entity affiliated with A B JS Hotel Development Inc JS on or 3 about December 19 2019 4 4 The true identities and individual partnership and or corporate status of DOES 2 5 through 20 are currently unknown to Plaintiff who therefore sues such Defendants in such 6 fictitious capacities until such time as Plaintiff discovers each such Defendants true names and 7 identities as well as the specific conduct committed by such Defendants as against Plaintiff At 8 such time as Plaintiff discovers the true names and identities of each such DOE Defendants 9 Plaintiff will amend by DOE amendment and or will seek leave to amend this First Amended 10 Complaint and substitute the true names for the fictitious identities sued hereupon 11 5 Plaintiff is informed and believes and based thereon alleges that Defendants A B 12 MAA and DOES 2 20 are parent subsidiary entities sister companies or the alter egos of an 13 individual and A B MAA and DOES 2 20 collectively Defendants are all part of a single 14 enterprise Real property records reflect that the entity JS which Plaintiff is informed and believes 15 was also under the control of DOES 2 20 transferred a parcel of property within the subject 16 property to MAA after Plaintiff made demand for payment as alleged in Plaintif s original 17 Complaint Available corporate records reflect that JS was dissolved on or about May 11 2020 18 with the same individual signing all relevant documents concerning the property transfer by JS to 19 MAA and the dissolution of JS Moreover Plaintiff is informed and believes that A B and MAA 20 are entities specifically formed and maintained for purposes of limiting the personal exposure of 21 A B and DOES 2 20 and that these entities and persons routinely commingles the assets of these 22 alter ego entities in complete disregard of their purported separate identities Plaintiff is further 23 informed and believes and hereby alleges that A B and MAA are fraudulent and or improperly 24 maintained solely to defraud persons such as Plaintiff as creditors and that such entities must be 25 disregarded pursuant to the doctrine of piercing the corporate veil By virtue of application of 26 this doctrine and because an inequitable result would follow any failure to hold all such 27 Defendants jointly and severally responsible for the damages complained of herein all Defendants 28 named herein are jointly and severally liable for each and all of Plaintiff s injuries as the alter ego 2 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT