Document for NEWSTART REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT LLC VS JACK HUANG ET AL

• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                e
          ROBERT GENTINO, SB# 93808
          SHERRI MATTA, SB# 275418
          IVY GAO, SB#312267
          LAW OFFICE OF ROBERT GENTINO                                               FILED
          3330 Cahuenga Blvd. West #303                                      Superior Court of California
                                                                                County of Los Angeles
          Los Angeles, California 90068
          818.509.7272                                                             AUG 23 2018
          Attorney for Defendants                                      Sherri R. Caiier, ENgcutive Uiificer/Clerk
          Jack Huang and Regal Rock, Inc.                               By.          i                 » Deputy
                                                                                 Brittny Smith




                            SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
                                            COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

     10

     11   NEWSTART REAL ESTATE                             # BC 502 938
          INVESTMENT, LLC                                  Hon. Edward B. Moreton, Jr. — Dept. 44
     12
                        Plaintiff                          REPLY SUPPORTING MOTION TO RECALL
     13          Vv.                                       AND QUASH WRIT OF EXECUTION
                                                           ISSUED 3-14-18
     14   JACK HUANG;      REGAL ROCK, INC.;
          JADE ESCROW, INC.; RACHEL KAO;
     15   325 FLAMINGO LLC; BIN FENG                       August 30, 2018
          CHENG; FU HSIUNG CHENG; ALLEN                    9:30 a.m.
     16   YEH; JENNIFER YEH; TONY YEH.                     Dept. 44
     17
                        Defendants.
     18

     19

     20   L      PLAINTIFF BOLDLY           DECEIVES    THE    COURT      TO CONCEAL             HIS ABUSE          OF
     21   PROCESS
     22          To try to cover its abuse of process, Plaintiff boldly deceives this Court by claiming: “The
     23   Writ-of Execution in this case was issued on March. 14, 2018, before Huang’s Motion for New Trial
     24   was heard” (Opposition @ 4:10-11) notwithstanding Plaintiff's Exhibit B, filed.3-7-18 which states
oD
ca   25   “Based on the record presented, the court believes that punitive damages of approximately 15% of
no   26
dm        Huang’s annual income, or damages in the amount of $10,000 would be sufficient to punish Huang
ho
aD   27   and deter him from the commission of similar acts.     For these reasons, the court GRANTS                the
Be
ce
     28   motion in-part on the issue of punitive damages...” Ex. B @ 15.
                                                           -1-
               REPLY SUPPORTING MOTION TO RECALL AND QUASH WRIT OF EXECUTION ISSUED 3-14-18