Preview
Nicholas A. Rogers, Califomia Bar No. 248900
Daniel S. LaCount, Califomia Bar No. 244306
BERDING & WEIL LLP
2175 N. Califomia Blvd, Suite 500
Walnut Creek, Califomia 94596
Telephone: 925/838-2090
Facsimile: 925/820-5592
nrogers@berdingweil.com
dlacount@berdingweil.com.
Attomeys for Defendants
VIETNAM TOWN CONDOMINIUM OWNERS
ASSOCIATION, INC.; JOSEPH NGUY EN;
KHANH CAO HUU; andJOANY YUIN
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA - UNLIMITED CIVIL
SAN FRANCISCO PIZZA, INC., TAN No. 17CV318151
NGUYEN, NGHIA NGUYEN and KIM
THUY HO, UEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE IN
SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS MOTION
Plaintiffs, TO COMPEL DISCOVERY AND
REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS OF
AGAINST PLAINTIFFS TAN
NGUYEN, NGHIA NGUYENAND KIM
VIETNAM TOWN CONDOMINIUM THUY HO AND THEIR COUNSEL
OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC.; MATRIX ATTORNEY ROBERT T. TANG
ASSOCIATION MANAGEMENT; JOSEPH
NGUYEN, an Individual; KHANH CAO
HUU, an Individual; JOANY YUIN, an Date: November 29, 2018
Individual; NGOC BUI, an Individual; LAP Time: 9:00 am.
T. TANG, an Individual; MICHAEL Dept: 19
JOHNSON, an Individual; DAVID
ALVARADO, an Individual; and DOES 1
through 50 inclusive, Action Filed: October 25, 2017
Trial Date: None
Defendants.
Defendants VIETNAM TOWN CONDOMINIUM OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC.;
JOSEPH NGUY
EN; KHANH CAO HUU; and JOANY YUIN (collectively referred to herein as
“Defendants”) respectfully requests that the Court take judicial notice of the following document
pursuant to Evidence Code section 451 through 453:
MI
Eecurema
mt Ck, Cafsaa
aysNeaien e. 9105
REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL WRITTEN DISCOVERY
Defendants’ First Amended Complaint filed on or around May 15, 2018, attached hereto
as “Exhibit A.”
Date: September 10, 2018 BERDING & WEIL LLP
By:
Ni
\
las A.
£
Daniel S. LaCount
Attomeys for Defendants
VIETNAM TOWN CONDOMINIUM
OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC.; JOSEPH
10 NGUYEN; KHANH CAO HUU; and JOANY
YUIN
11
12
13
‘X:\Wdocs\8472\92\PLD\00956388.
DOCX
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24.
25
26
27
28
Eecurema
mt Ck, Cafsaa
aysNeaien e. 9105
REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL WRITTEN DISCOVERY
EXHIBITA
ya w
ev
ANG ESQ
ad.
a
TAN EN.N
0 SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE ATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTYO ANT CLARA COUNTS
AN SCO Case No 17CN 18151
EN KIM }
VERIFIE
AMEN COMPL. ao FOR
Pl TR RE SS, CONV!
NT. TIONAL INT: REERENCE WITH
XS OSPE VE JNOMIC
DVANT. GE. R AC
VI ETNA OWN CONDOMINIUM ) CONT. ACT, DEC ARAT Y RELI
16 iN S ASSOCI TION. INC FRAL EGL ok vy
17 MA ICL ION R PRE: TA TION VIL
MAN EN OSEP NG YE TORTION and UNL. WEL
an BUSINE PRACTICES
18 cad Ulan
ndi JOANY YUIN
19 ndivi OCB ividual
T. TANG, an Ind id
20 MIC EL ON
2h DAVID AL ARADO, an Indiv al
35 and DOES
22 UNLIMITED JURISDICTION
Defenda:
23
23 Ce ow Pl San Piz in Nguyen, Nghia Nguyen a: Thuy
24 Ho and allege as follows
255 guy nd Kirr © are the the
26
26 com own as condominium 9015 at 999 Story Road, SanJ ose.
7 5
California cquired title on Se mber 16.
28
28
VERIFIED FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TRESPASS, CONVERSION; INTENTIONAL INTERFERENCE,
WITH PROSPECTIVE ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE, BREACH OF CONTRACT, DECLARATORY RELIEF,
FRAUD, NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION, CIVIL EXTORTION, AND UNLAWFUL BUSINESS PRACTICES
Plaintiff San Francisco Pizza, Inc. is the tenant of Plaintifis Tan Nguyen, Nghia
2 Nguyen and Kim Thuy Ho of Unit 9015, having entered into a lease agreement with said Plaintiff
33 on or about October 4, 2016.
4A 3) Defendant Vietnam Town Condominium Owners Association, Inc. (hereinafter
referred to as "VTCOA") is a commercial condominium association formed under California law
pursuant to the “Declaration Establishing A Plan For Commercial Condominium Ownership”
a
(hereinafter ref red to as “the Plan") dated November ZU
4) Detendant Mauix Association Management (hereinafter "Matrix ) is a California
business entity ora fictitious name for en dividual or entity, form unknown, doir business in the
10 County of Santa Clara as a property man ment company and is curren’ actir s the mani
agentforthe VTCO: rthe Vietnam Town Condominium projec suantto a write ene
enc ontract wi
12 ithe VICOA.
14 Defendants Joseph yen Joany Yuin: 3 g ¢ Bui-Khanh Cao Huu. were atall times
13
member: he board of directo: e VICOA. Joseph Nguyen was acti On eh al? of the
beh
VTICOA wi thik
thth e know led
leds nd consent of all other board members.
16 8) Di ndant Lap T. Tan, n individual residing 2 the County of Santa Clara and the
i7 original developer of the VTCOA.
4
déig / Defendant Michael Johnson is an individual residir nd deir bu isl messin u he€Co Oo unty
2
19 of Santa Clara as a real estate agent. Defendant \ hael Johnson represer n 1 ted Plainti yen,
209 N, guyen aryry d Ho as th eir
eir rea
ea | estate agent wh hey purchased U: 1 981
21
2 §) D endant David Alvarado at all times herein mentioned was an employee of Matrix
222 and was employed to act as the mana g a gent for the Vietnam Town Condominium projec!
an OY Ve
2323 9 Plaintiffs are informed and be weve and 4. lege that prior to the pur ase
a fter ceased to exist
24 of. unit 90 y P ntiffs, the “d larant” referenced in the CC&R and here
25
25 as @ legal e mtity 1d th 0: announced at a formal meeting for owners th food units could be
ne dditio ssion
8s ney have allowed such conversions for
25 es ved in any units withou!
44 ee ent. Numerous units converted to food units without forn 12. ova.
27 ea ithout written
28 2-
VERIFIED FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TRESPASS: CONVERSION, INTENTIONAL
INTERFERENCE WITH PROSPECTIVE ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE: BREACH OF CONTRACT:
DECLARATORY RELIEF: FRAUD: NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION: CIVIL EXTORTION: AND
UNLAWFUL BUSINESS PRACTICES
10) Plaint ffs are ignor tof the true names and capacities of the Defendants sued herein
as DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, and therefore sues these Defenda: ntnt s by such Hctitious names.
i Plaintiffs will amend this complaint to allege their true n mes and capac! ies when ascertained.
oe
Plai: are informed and believe, and thereon all ece
ege ththi at each of the fictitious named Defenda:
is negligent and responsible in some manner for occu ences Te! aiter alleged, and that Plainti et
injuries as herein alleged were proximately caused by the negligence of these Defendants.
1) 3gents
Atall times herein mentioned, DOES 1 through 50, and each of them, we! T thea gents
an or employees
tT of Defenda ind in doing the th: s hereinafter alleged, were act nthe course
9 ang se ope
ope of their agency and employment and with the express permission and consent of said
id Defendants,
say
il 12) In 2016, Pla engaged defendant Michael Johnson to re; sent them as real
nt +
1
12 estate age: nt tato purchase it 9015 in the \ nam Town Cond um project. At the time they
at
13 engaged Michael Johnson and5 ior to their purchase of U 90 Plain’ me cd; defendant
for me
haelel k os in that they wer sted in purchasing al is ec
ec ical the purpose of oper
art hew
18
13 a restaurer Unit Michael John. ted to Plair at he imately familia: h
the UsU he himself owned one and th t there WwW as no restriction on the use it 9015 to ope te
, nthe
7 as ti fthey Ppurch U Prio to escrow clo: Plaintif etal ne:
1212 ices fa lic ed ar ect, Hau Chi g Liao. who examined Unit 9015 in the prese: nee
nce of Michael
18
19 Johnson and a contractor, To mm Ch:
Ch u anc discussed th orprelimi na 00 anf Uni
Michael Johns hov ne the layout
of the restaurant and specifically scussed the use fa gas line
20
4) ‘o supply gas or the k hen appliances Michael Johnsoni: rmed Plain Ho th hree
nee
21
4522
22
fthe
fthe in Building 979 were 1Ileased
} toa te t who had builta Kor barbecue restaurant using
+
the
the am "L +}ue Lal that had b een
een suppl agas li ne
net 0) r its use althoug. t was orig: hy
"
34
24 ces asarT utit @ Plan. Michael Jo ‘on assured Plai ‘Or m Thuyh Ho,
tha if they purchased Linit 90 and used Tom Chau as the rant 4t! hey
the contractor to buil d thhi e restau rant
2626 would h a gas line made available for t restaurant
—— —_—~ — ——
5
VERIFIED FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TRESPASS: CONVERSION; NIETONL INTERFERENCE WITH PROSPECTIVE ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE BREACH OF
CONTRACT: DECLARATORY RELIEF FRAUD: NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENT ATION: CIVIL EXTORTION: AND UNLAWFUL BUSINESS PRACTICES
13) ffs purchased Unit 9015 eliance upon the represe ations made by Michael
Johnson and paid $610,000.00 to purchase said Unit.
14) Plair {s thereafter fired ral contracto! Tom Chau, who later demanded
wr D approva. om the Board & pa
D a n attempt to excuse hfimself from per mfig. Pl
Ho thereafier contacte Joany Vt one of the four members of the VTCOA board of
directors nd asked io Ms. Ho needed to speak with to have 9015 approved for use as a
rest ntnt Ms. Yuin stated that Plai if should comtact David Alvarado to obtain answe o her
que:esot ns1$ Piai Ho thereafter contacted David Alvarado and on May 15 2017 requested, in
ave hat Mr. Alvarado have the Board grant permissionina lett
lew er from the VTCOA to install a
1010 ga:
¢ a $ line in Unit 901 to oOop erate as 4 pizza restaurant Plai + 's thereafter s nitted for the
il restaurant to David Alvarado, as the managing agent for the VTCOA, requesting approval from the
12 VICOA 01 be appr oved as a pizza restaurant David Alvarado o inin: ©formed
"3 Plai heir U: was approved use as a restaurant and th: nes and meters that
3
oo
serves Buiidi g 90¢ that had noty een con nected
nected toa Unit Building oF were owned by the
VTCOA
is nd were aval € to be c ne 2c) ed to n e build which were oper gas
5
restaurants On or about Aug 7. David Alvarado received a draft of a! ‘om counsel
7 for
for Pi Stobes dpa vidA
ntto Jennifer Tuyet Tran an dDa rado statin that Plainti had followed
1S all of the appropriate steps io obtain approval bo by the VICOA as weil as by PG & E for the
18
igio restau int. Althou atado made a numb o:er of
of changes substantive addi tou e dra
20 le hed e the stateme! at Plain’ 's had owed a) 0! € app te steps to
21 obtain approval. Plain ffsfs counsel incorpora’ cd the changes made by Mr. Alvarado aann sent the
79
22 let 0 Mz. Alvarado and Ms Tr an
an. Pia are informed and believe thataDD; avi varado
forwarded the letter to the Board. Plair is relied upon Mi. Al avado's rat fie:
tification an d approval of
the wi ‘ding contai ned
ned he draft letter that they had followed all fihea ‘OpF fe steps to obtain
approval of Unit 9015 to operate as a restaura nt.
26 15} FP: fs are informed and believe and thereon hree years the
a5 VTCOA has been allowing the conversion o ter retai as described in nibi t De
ac ~ —
28 “ge
1
VERIFIED FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TRESPASS, CONVERSION; INTENTIONAL INTERFERENCE WITH
PROSPECTIVE ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE, BREACH OF CONTRACT, DECLARATORY RELIEF, FRAUD, NEGLIGENT
MISREPRESENTATION, CIVIL EXTORTION, AND UNLAWFUL BUSINESS PRACTICES
ithe Plan, to be conver! ‘t ‘ed to resta ura se and to be supplied with a gas line without follow
ure +t ‘0 forr
|process or proced ure ap ove the Units and w suing an approval in wi ng.
Examples ofs uch
uch Units are “Li le Lamb Korean Barbecue" in U! nits 7084, 7087 and 7090 in Building
979; "Tea for 4 Life" in Unit 6081 in Building 989: “Hot Pot Angel" in Unit 9030 and "Linda
ae an
re: sso§ an
'Sandwiches" in U 9084 in Build: 2 999;ai id AlinaE dv hes" in Units 6027 and 6030
in B Iding 969. The board of directors for VTCOA has, ©: y the last three years. or m failed to
|p tle; sand functions as the manag
‘orm its du tle: ig board irectors for the VTCOA byfailing to hold
meetings, failing to consider and approve applications for Unit to be approved for restaurant use, and
by fai gto enforce the rules of the VTCOA as set forth in the Plan. Instead, for the past three years.
10 jor more, the board of directors for the VTCOA has delegated all of 's duties and responsibilities to
ll manage the condor: nium roject and enforce the rules of the X VTCOA to David Al ado who has
12 acted a t he mana; g agent for the WTCOA. The VTCOA has ra edall he conduct of David
13 | Alvarado by ta g no steps to disapprove the statements made by Mr. Alvarado on behalf o
id board or by r nding any acti s taken by I
c
15 or abo of 2017, Plaint hr 1 Thuyh Ho, contacted Michael
16 son to request S aS nce n dete: 17 gw the y should use to supply U ois
gas Mr. Johnson 1ed PI fs that his wife wo udul dallow them to use a gas ir ne currently
18 noi jn use on buil ¢ 999 she was pai aad & .009.00. he right to use 's is not a property
19 right held by the Unit owners before the line is rected to the: Unit Pl jain i § are rmed and
20 beli id thereon aile: geth
ge thi at defend: LapTTa g a fiel hael ohnson veve eng. inan cal
gala
oa tance in obt
21
pr € 0) nan nonev from Unit owners to ob ai he gas line for
yn tr
22 an ri ret ly de: edda asa retal nE D Plan
1
23 reliance upon the representations made by David Alvarado, P. lal rancisco
2a, Inc. has spent in excess of $500.0 00.00
00.00 71 nmaking the tenan! iprovements to cons uct
a pizza
28 re 9018 el 1c! eon Tere sen) iddaa oval of D Alvarado on behalf
26 he VTCOA PI red aplumbing ntractor to work v PG&E nstall @ s ine from
at one of the meters co mmon area for Bui
he co! 99910 U oC Said contractor ¢ ected
ng
<8
VER! RSST AMENDED CC AINT ES) ASS ONVE S10 eet TION ERFERE Ti
IVEE ON AIC A TAGE. BR CH TRA
PRA OF CON DECLARATORY RELIEF, FRAUD. 1G ET
ROSPEC
MISREPRE VTON, CIVIL DUNLAWFEL St PI ICES
i gas line to a meter and then c inected the line Unit 9015. Said gas line wa s thereafte: rte:
T te! sted and
5
approved by the City of San Jose.
4
3 18) As of the date of this complai ntint, Plaintifis have completed all of the tenant
44 [Improvements and have completed the final inspection of Unit 9015 now ready to open and
55 operate as a pizza restaurant.
é 19) On or about August 31. 201 Amy Thuan N, gg yen Vuand Cuong Tat Vu. as Trustees
7 of he Vu F ly Tr Cr eAeal ted 9g 2004 (collec ly referred to hereafter as "Vu filed suit for
8 injunctive and declaratory relie f i n itert
terfe tence. trespass and breach of contract n aming as defendants
9 fs named
each of the Plainti. ifs herein as well as the VTCOA. The case was assigned case number 17
+
10 (CV 318384 I Thereafter, Vu moved fo: raa temporary restraining : rder
rder ontwooccasions, both of whic
ep cations VETE ¢ ied.- The matter was set for a hearing on the Vu appl. ti ‘on for a preliminary
Ti) on for October 17, The ter WAS a5: ed to Ju Brian Wal h of Sant a Clara
e Sant
County Ce ‘or e he m was pe! and before any evidence w
14 ;taken, the part s voluntarily parti ce i pat
pat ed in amedi ion with Bradley Bening Vu and the VTCOA
45 excluded Plaint fs herein from the settlement discussions mid-way t f nrough the day the mediation
16 took pla 2.e, . reaching aa settlement that was confidential and which Vu and the VTCOA refused to
17 divulge to Plaintiffs herein and the court on e moming the matter was scheduled to proceed for
fo:
hea: Instead, Vu agreed to volunte dismiss the complaint a lalai iffs in exchange for
18 LP
19 Plaint hene! Tein Wai co; of suit. Plaint elieves and alleges that
that appro Iwi Ir ev bet
Ww ing because the Board would incur more laws No converted unit has written approva
221 20) Plaintiffs he rein therea: fer
Mer commenced taking all of the rem; 2 steps necessa to
45 have the final inspection of the restaurant made by the City of San Jose by having the alarm system
222
23 completed and ready for connection to the building alarm system and final testing. Plain
524 commenced operation of the restaurant by hiring employees to cook and serve food in a " oft
open: to prepare for an opening to the public. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon
26 allege thaton or about October 19 or 2 2017, defendants Lap Tang and Joseph> uyen engaged the
4 services ofdefendant Aquatek Plumbing Inc. to disconnect the gas line to the meter servi Plaintiffs’
27
2
a
“eo
-6
VE RST ENDED
MPL OR TRES CONVER! ON; INTEN FERENCE \ H
PROSPEC IVE co MIT ADV AGE, BREA OF CONTRAC DECLARAT ORY RELIE RAUD, NEGLIGENT
ESE. ch LEX ORTION, AND UNLAWFUL BUSINESS PRAC IC
1 Wn ot att
erea. en AY CO! Te tor e} To Tai n in acce ‘Oo common ér eaof
ea of
2 ithe attic or roo ararea t ot ne alarm §& mM ans or tor connect th eg as ne, Plaintiffs are Orme
nd bel 5 iev tear
bel @ a hereon alleg that defe tVTCOA re tf duct
a a take place
(Or lear:
ear ned abo mediately afterwards and have TO ved
ved ad c the conduct of defe: dai
d Aaautek in di ne ga: 1e and prev ating Plai fr om
vee
66 irec es.
by ace eS: g the common 4 ey ave a legal ri ht to do based
Ser men acce, ante inder Plar
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
(Trespass against all defendants, excluding Michael Johnson)
corporate by refer and : reallege h set forth i erel
10 Pla ce anc as iO zn ere) n
Mt e every ra h 20 se above.
il
{2 eCec! si ameter w sent oF
c ce ted
re TCOA, PG & E and the Cc ols Jos cea as eter and line are co ected oan
dividual condom: Un
Ur SE, in 1020 r the pro‘OP 9:
ifs
1s VTCOA nor a part of common area. Tn stead
ead, ArOD
TO of PGE nd U
= and 1er toto
whic connect are ad elieve er eee ¢
26 0)
7 def dal exc d Mic aae! LT ec ag ec resnass uD lain ne
gas ef ro net ab blocoe ace:
et com
ig
‘OFom acces and
28o preve! Pl aN ace ° e. Defenc: Ss and
ei m intent to ca P a condu
or p Sp erty and y and
anc S hav
i O
sul red id w er Gi ages Est) nat
iat ed1 0 be ex ce
ce SS 1,000 by reason of nda
endai
4 co! uc
23
23) Said espass 8 om: ed
eT ic OU
OU! Var intentte oppress andca
andca' use narm
25 Pl g Pi ‘ar of ve na ed
arded
25
ne1e bas ed @ ¢ de
uct of def of
ofP ai2 fs ne atat
26
26
3° dam a ty det
det cal id a toto th
ae
a8
VERIFIED FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TRESPASS, CONVERSION; INTENITIONAL INTERFERENCE
WITHPROSPECTIVE ECONOMIC ADV AGE, BREACH OF CONTRACT, DECLARATORY RELIEF, FRAUD, NEGLIGENT
MISREPRESENTATION, CIVIL EXTORTION, AND UNLAWFUL BUSINESS PRACTICES
1 compensatory damages awarded. Wherefore, Plaintiffs pray rcomp atory damages of $5,000,000
2 janc punitive damages in a sum to be determined by the fury at triai
24) Defendants’ conduct in trespassi g upon and disconnecting the gas line owned by
4 Plai
Preview
Nicholas A. Rogers, Califomia Bar No. 248900 Daniel S. LaCount, Califomia Bar No. 244306 BERDING & WEIL LLP 2175 N. Califomia Blvd, Suite 500 Walnut Creek, Califomia 94596 Telephone: 925/838-2090 Facsimile: 925/820-5592 nrogers@berdingweil.com dlacount@berdingweil.com. Attomeys for Defendants VIETNAM TOWN CONDOMINIUM OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC.; JOSEPH NGUY EN; KHANH CAO HUU; andJOANY YUIN SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA - UNLIMITED CIVIL SAN FRANCISCO PIZZA, INC., TAN No. 17CV318151 NGUYEN, NGHIA NGUYEN and KIM THUY HO, UEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS MOTION Plaintiffs, TO COMPEL DISCOVERY AND REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS OF AGAINST PLAINTIFFS TAN NGUYEN, NGHIA NGUYENAND KIM VIETNAM TOWN CONDOMINIUM THUY HO AND THEIR COUNSEL OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC.; MATRIX ATTORNEY ROBERT T. TANG ASSOCIATION MANAGEMENT; JOSEPH NGUYEN, an Individual; KHANH CAO HUU, an Individual; JOANY YUIN, an Date: November 29, 2018 Individual; NGOC BUI, an Individual; LAP Time: 9:00 am. T. TANG, an Individual; MICHAEL Dept: 19 JOHNSON, an Individual; DAVID ALVARADO, an Individual; and DOES 1 through 50 inclusive, Action Filed: October 25, 2017 Trial Date: None Defendants. Defendants VIETNAM TOWN CONDOMINIUM OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC.; JOSEPH NGUY EN; KHANH CAO HUU; and JOANY YUIN (collectively referred to herein as “Defendants”) respectfully requests that the Court take judicial notice of the following document pursuant to Evidence Code section 451 through 453: MI Eecurema mt Ck, Cafsaa aysNeaien e. 9105 REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL WRITTEN DISCOVERY Defendants’ First Amended Complaint filed on or around May 15, 2018, attached hereto as “Exhibit A.” Date: September 10, 2018 BERDING & WEIL LLP By: Ni \ las A. £ Daniel S. LaCount Attomeys for Defendants VIETNAM TOWN CONDOMINIUM OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC.; JOSEPH 10 NGUYEN; KHANH CAO HUU; and JOANY YUIN 11 12 13 ‘X:\Wdocs\8472\92\PLD\00956388. DOCX 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24. 25 26 27 28 Eecurema mt Ck, Cafsaa aysNeaien e. 9105 REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL WRITTEN DISCOVERY EXHIBITA ya w ev ANG ESQ ad. a TAN EN.N 0 SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE ATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTYO ANT CLARA COUNTS AN SCO Case No 17CN 18151 EN KIM } VERIFIE AMEN COMPL. ao FOR Pl TR RE SS, CONV! NT. TIONAL INT: REERENCE WITH XS OSPE VE JNOMIC DVANT. GE. R AC VI ETNA OWN CONDOMINIUM ) CONT. ACT, DEC ARAT Y RELI 16 iN S ASSOCI TION. INC FRAL EGL ok vy 17 MA ICL ION R PRE: TA TION VIL MAN EN OSEP NG YE TORTION and UNL. WEL an BUSINE PRACTICES 18 cad Ulan ndi JOANY YUIN 19 ndivi OCB ividual T. TANG, an Ind id 20 MIC EL ON 2h DAVID AL ARADO, an Indiv al 35 and DOES 22 UNLIMITED JURISDICTION Defenda: 23 23 Ce ow Pl San Piz in Nguyen, Nghia Nguyen a: Thuy 24 Ho and allege as follows 255 guy nd Kirr © are the the 26 26 com own as condominium 9015 at 999 Story Road, SanJ ose. 7 5 California cquired title on Se mber 16. 28 28 VERIFIED FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TRESPASS, CONVERSION; INTENTIONAL INTERFERENCE, WITH PROSPECTIVE ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE, BREACH OF CONTRACT, DECLARATORY RELIEF, FRAUD, NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION, CIVIL EXTORTION, AND UNLAWFUL BUSINESS PRACTICES Plaintiff San Francisco Pizza, Inc. is the tenant of Plaintifis Tan Nguyen, Nghia 2 Nguyen and Kim Thuy Ho of Unit 9015, having entered into a lease agreement with said Plaintiff 33 on or about October 4, 2016. 4A 3) Defendant Vietnam Town Condominium Owners Association, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as "VTCOA") is a commercial condominium association formed under California law pursuant to the “Declaration Establishing A Plan For Commercial Condominium Ownership” a (hereinafter ref red to as “the Plan") dated November ZU 4) Detendant Mauix Association Management (hereinafter "Matrix ) is a California business entity ora fictitious name for en dividual or entity, form unknown, doir business in the 10 County of Santa Clara as a property man ment company and is curren’ actir s the mani agentforthe VTCO: rthe Vietnam Town Condominium projec suantto a write ene enc ontract wi 12 ithe VICOA. 14 Defendants Joseph yen Joany Yuin: 3 g ¢ Bui-Khanh Cao Huu. were atall times 13 member: he board of directo: e VICOA. Joseph Nguyen was acti On eh al? of the beh VTICOA wi thik thth e know led leds nd consent of all other board members. 16 8) Di ndant Lap T. Tan, n individual residing 2 the County of Santa Clara and the i7 original developer of the VTCOA. 4 déig / Defendant Michael Johnson is an individual residir nd deir bu isl messin u he€Co Oo unty 2 19 of Santa Clara as a real estate agent. Defendant \ hael Johnson represer n 1 ted Plainti yen, 209 N, guyen aryry d Ho as th eir eir rea ea | estate agent wh hey purchased U: 1 981 21 2 §) D endant David Alvarado at all times herein mentioned was an employee of Matrix 222 and was employed to act as the mana g a gent for the Vietnam Town Condominium projec! an OY Ve 2323 9 Plaintiffs are informed and be weve and 4. lege that prior to the pur ase a fter ceased to exist 24 of. unit 90 y P ntiffs, the “d larant” referenced in the CC&R and here 25 25 as @ legal e mtity 1d th 0: announced at a formal meeting for owners th food units could be ne dditio ssion 8s ney have allowed such conversions for 25 es ved in any units withou! 44 ee ent. Numerous units converted to food units without forn 12. ova. 27 ea ithout written 28 2- VERIFIED FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TRESPASS: CONVERSION, INTENTIONAL INTERFERENCE WITH PROSPECTIVE ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE: BREACH OF CONTRACT: DECLARATORY RELIEF: FRAUD: NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION: CIVIL EXTORTION: AND UNLAWFUL BUSINESS PRACTICES 10) Plaint ffs are ignor tof the true names and capacities of the Defendants sued herein as DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, and therefore sues these Defenda: ntnt s by such Hctitious names. i Plaintiffs will amend this complaint to allege their true n mes and capac! ies when ascertained. oe Plai: are informed and believe, and thereon all ece ege ththi at each of the fictitious named Defenda: is negligent and responsible in some manner for occu ences Te! aiter alleged, and that Plainti et injuries as herein alleged were proximately caused by the negligence of these Defendants. 1) 3gents Atall times herein mentioned, DOES 1 through 50, and each of them, we! T thea gents an or employees tT of Defenda ind in doing the th: s hereinafter alleged, were act nthe course 9 ang se ope ope of their agency and employment and with the express permission and consent of said id Defendants, say il 12) In 2016, Pla engaged defendant Michael Johnson to re; sent them as real nt + 1 12 estate age: nt tato purchase it 9015 in the \ nam Town Cond um project. At the time they at 13 engaged Michael Johnson and5 ior to their purchase of U 90 Plain’ me cd; defendant for me haelel k os in that they wer sted in purchasing al is ec ec ical the purpose of oper art hew 18 13 a restaurer Unit Michael John. ted to Plair at he imately familia: h the UsU he himself owned one and th t there WwW as no restriction on the use it 9015 to ope te , nthe 7 as ti fthey Ppurch U Prio to escrow clo: Plaintif etal ne: 1212 ices fa lic ed ar ect, Hau Chi g Liao. who examined Unit 9015 in the prese: nee nce of Michael 18 19 Johnson and a contractor, To mm Ch: Ch u anc discussed th orprelimi na 00 anf Uni Michael Johns hov ne the layout of the restaurant and specifically scussed the use fa gas line 20 4) ‘o supply gas or the k hen appliances Michael Johnsoni: rmed Plain Ho th hree nee 21 4522 22 fthe fthe in Building 979 were 1Ileased } toa te t who had builta Kor barbecue restaurant using + the the am "L +}ue Lal that had b een een suppl agas li ne net 0) r its use althoug. t was orig: hy " 34 24 ces asarT utit @ Plan. Michael Jo ‘on assured Plai ‘Or m Thuyh Ho, tha if they purchased Linit 90 and used Tom Chau as the rant 4t! hey the contractor to buil d thhi e restau rant 2626 would h a gas line made available for t restaurant —— —_—~ — —— 5 VERIFIED FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TRESPASS: CONVERSION; NIETONL INTERFERENCE WITH PROSPECTIVE ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE BREACH OF CONTRACT: DECLARATORY RELIEF FRAUD: NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENT ATION: CIVIL EXTORTION: AND UNLAWFUL BUSINESS PRACTICES 13) ffs purchased Unit 9015 eliance upon the represe ations made by Michael Johnson and paid $610,000.00 to purchase said Unit. 14) Plair {s thereafter fired ral contracto! Tom Chau, who later demanded wr D approva. om the Board & pa D a n attempt to excuse hfimself from per mfig. Pl Ho thereafier contacte Joany Vt one of the four members of the VTCOA board of directors nd asked io Ms. Ho needed to speak with to have 9015 approved for use as a rest ntnt Ms. Yuin stated that Plai if should comtact David Alvarado to obtain answe o her que:esot ns1$ Piai Ho thereafter contacted David Alvarado and on May 15 2017 requested, in ave hat Mr. Alvarado have the Board grant permissionina lett lew er from the VTCOA to install a 1010 ga: ¢ a $ line in Unit 901 to oOop erate as 4 pizza restaurant Plai + 's thereafter s nitted for the il restaurant to David Alvarado, as the managing agent for the VTCOA, requesting approval from the 12 VICOA 01 be appr oved as a pizza restaurant David Alvarado o inin: ©formed "3 Plai heir U: was approved use as a restaurant and th: nes and meters that 3 oo serves Buiidi g 90¢ that had noty een con nected nected toa Unit Building oF were owned by the VTCOA is nd were aval € to be c ne 2c) ed to n e build which were oper gas 5 restaurants On or about Aug 7. David Alvarado received a draft of a! ‘om counsel 7 for for Pi Stobes dpa vidA ntto Jennifer Tuyet Tran an dDa rado statin that Plainti had followed 1S all of the appropriate steps io obtain approval bo by the VICOA as weil as by PG & E for the 18 igio restau int. Althou atado made a numb o:er of of changes substantive addi tou e dra 20 le hed e the stateme! at Plain’ 's had owed a) 0! € app te steps to 21 obtain approval. Plain ffsfs counsel incorpora’ cd the changes made by Mr. Alvarado aann sent the 79 22 let 0 Mz. Alvarado and Ms Tr an an. Pia are informed and believe thataDD; avi varado forwarded the letter to the Board. Plair is relied upon Mi. Al avado's rat fie: tification an d approval of the wi ‘ding contai ned ned he draft letter that they had followed all fihea ‘OpF fe steps to obtain approval of Unit 9015 to operate as a restaura nt. 26 15} FP: fs are informed and believe and thereon hree years the a5 VTCOA has been allowing the conversion o ter retai as described in nibi t De ac ~ — 28 “ge 1 VERIFIED FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TRESPASS, CONVERSION; INTENTIONAL INTERFERENCE WITH PROSPECTIVE ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE, BREACH OF CONTRACT, DECLARATORY RELIEF, FRAUD, NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION, CIVIL EXTORTION, AND UNLAWFUL BUSINESS PRACTICES ithe Plan, to be conver! ‘t ‘ed to resta ura se and to be supplied with a gas line without follow ure +t ‘0 forr |process or proced ure ap ove the Units and w suing an approval in wi ng. Examples ofs uch uch Units are “Li le Lamb Korean Barbecue" in U! nits 7084, 7087 and 7090 in Building 979; "Tea for 4 Life" in Unit 6081 in Building 989: “Hot Pot Angel" in Unit 9030 and "Linda ae an re: sso§ an 'Sandwiches" in U 9084 in Build: 2 999;ai id AlinaE dv hes" in Units 6027 and 6030 in B Iding 969. The board of directors for VTCOA has, ©: y the last three years. or m failed to |p tle; sand functions as the manag ‘orm its du tle: ig board irectors for the VTCOA byfailing to hold meetings, failing to consider and approve applications for Unit to be approved for restaurant use, and by fai gto enforce the rules of the VTCOA as set forth in the Plan. Instead, for the past three years. 10 jor more, the board of directors for the VTCOA has delegated all of 's duties and responsibilities to ll manage the condor: nium roject and enforce the rules of the X VTCOA to David Al ado who has 12 acted a t he mana; g agent for the WTCOA. The VTCOA has ra edall he conduct of David 13 | Alvarado by ta g no steps to disapprove the statements made by Mr. Alvarado on behalf o id board or by r nding any acti s taken by I c 15 or abo of 2017, Plaint hr 1 Thuyh Ho, contacted Michael 16 son to request S aS nce n dete: 17 gw the y should use to supply U ois gas Mr. Johnson 1ed PI fs that his wife wo udul dallow them to use a gas ir ne currently 18 noi jn use on buil ¢ 999 she was pai aad & .009.00. he right to use 's is not a property 19 right held by the Unit owners before the line is rected to the: Unit Pl jain i § are rmed and 20 beli id thereon aile: geth ge thi at defend: LapTTa g a fiel hael ohnson veve eng. inan cal gala oa tance in obt 21 pr € 0) nan nonev from Unit owners to ob ai he gas line for yn tr 22 an ri ret ly de: edda asa retal nE D Plan 1 23 reliance upon the representations made by David Alvarado, P. lal rancisco 2a, Inc. has spent in excess of $500.0 00.00 00.00 71 nmaking the tenan! iprovements to cons uct a pizza 28 re 9018 el 1c! eon Tere sen) iddaa oval of D Alvarado on behalf 26 he VTCOA PI red aplumbing ntractor to work v PG&E nstall @ s ine from at one of the meters co mmon area for Bui he co! 99910 U oC Said contractor ¢ ected ng <8 VER! RSST AMENDED CC AINT ES) ASS ONVE S10 eet TION ERFERE Ti IVEE ON AIC A TAGE. BR CH TRA PRA OF CON DECLARATORY RELIEF, FRAUD. 1G ET ROSPEC MISREPRE VTON, CIVIL DUNLAWFEL St PI ICES i gas line to a meter and then c inected the line Unit 9015. Said gas line wa s thereafte: rte: T te! sted and 5 approved by the City of San Jose. 4 3 18) As of the date of this complai ntint, Plaintifis have completed all of the tenant 44 [Improvements and have completed the final inspection of Unit 9015 now ready to open and 55 operate as a pizza restaurant. é 19) On or about August 31. 201 Amy Thuan N, gg yen Vuand Cuong Tat Vu. as Trustees 7 of he Vu F ly Tr Cr eAeal ted 9g 2004 (collec ly referred to hereafter as "Vu filed suit for 8 injunctive and declaratory relie f i n itert terfe tence. trespass and breach of contract n aming as defendants 9 fs named each of the Plainti. ifs herein as well as the VTCOA. The case was assigned case number 17 + 10 (CV 318384 I Thereafter, Vu moved fo: raa temporary restraining : rder rder ontwooccasions, both of whic ep cations VETE ¢ ied.- The matter was set for a hearing on the Vu appl. ti ‘on for a preliminary Ti) on for October 17, The ter WAS a5: ed to Ju Brian Wal h of Sant a Clara e Sant County Ce ‘or e he m was pe! and before any evidence w 14 ;taken, the part s voluntarily parti ce i pat pat ed in amedi ion with Bradley Bening Vu and the VTCOA 45 excluded Plaint fs herein from the settlement discussions mid-way t f nrough the day the mediation 16 took pla 2.e, . reaching aa settlement that was confidential and which Vu and the VTCOA refused to 17 divulge to Plaintiffs herein and the court on e moming the matter was scheduled to proceed for fo: hea: Instead, Vu agreed to volunte dismiss the complaint a lalai iffs in exchange for 18 LP 19 Plaint hene! Tein Wai co; of suit. Plaint elieves and alleges that that appro Iwi Ir ev bet Ww ing because the Board would incur more laws No converted unit has written approva 221 20) Plaintiffs he rein therea: fer Mer commenced taking all of the rem; 2 steps necessa to 45 have the final inspection of the restaurant made by the City of San Jose by having the alarm system 222 23 completed and ready for connection to the building alarm system and final testing. Plain 524 commenced operation of the restaurant by hiring employees to cook and serve food in a " oft open: to prepare for an opening to the public. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon 26 allege thaton or about October 19 or 2 2017, defendants Lap Tang and Joseph> uyen engaged the 4 services ofdefendant Aquatek Plumbing Inc. to disconnect the gas line to the meter servi Plaintiffs’ 27 2 a “eo -6 VE RST ENDED MPL OR TRES CONVER! ON; INTEN FERENCE \ H PROSPEC IVE co MIT ADV AGE, BREA OF CONTRAC DECLARAT ORY RELIE RAUD, NEGLIGENT ESE. ch LEX ORTION, AND UNLAWFUL BUSINESS PRAC IC 1 Wn ot att erea. en AY CO! Te tor e} To Tai n in acce ‘Oo common ér eaof ea of 2 ithe attic or roo ararea t ot ne alarm §& mM ans or tor connect th eg as ne, Plaintiffs are Orme nd bel 5 iev tear bel @ a hereon alleg that defe tVTCOA re tf duct a a take place (Or lear: ear ned abo mediately afterwards and have TO ved ved ad c the conduct of defe: dai d Aaautek in di ne ga: 1e and prev ating Plai fr om vee 66 irec es. by ace eS: g the common 4 ey ave a legal ri ht to do based Ser men acce, ante inder Plar FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION (Trespass against all defendants, excluding Michael Johnson) corporate by refer and : reallege h set forth i erel 10 Pla ce anc as iO zn ere) n Mt e every ra h 20 se above. il {2 eCec! si ameter w sent oF c ce ted re TCOA, PG & E and the Cc ols Jos cea as eter and line are co ected oan dividual condom: Un Ur SE, in 1020 r the pro‘OP 9: ifs 1s VTCOA nor a part of common area. Tn stead ead, ArOD TO of PGE nd U = and 1er toto whic connect are ad elieve er eee ¢ 26 0) 7 def dal exc d Mic aae! LT ec ag ec resnass uD lain ne gas ef ro net ab blocoe ace: et com ig ‘OFom acces and 28o preve! Pl aN ace ° e. Defenc: Ss and ei m intent to ca P a condu or p Sp erty and y and anc S hav i O sul red id w er Gi ages Est) nat iat ed1 0 be ex ce ce SS 1,000 by reason of nda endai 4 co! uc 23 23) Said espass 8 om: ed eT ic OU OU! Var intentte oppress andca andca' use narm 25 Pl g Pi ‘ar of ve na ed arded 25 ne1e bas ed @ ¢ de uct of def of ofP ai2 fs ne atat 26 26 3° dam a ty det det cal id a toto th ae a8 VERIFIED FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TRESPASS, CONVERSION; INTENITIONAL INTERFERENCE WITHPROSPECTIVE ECONOMIC ADV AGE, BREACH OF CONTRACT, DECLARATORY RELIEF, FRAUD, NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION, CIVIL EXTORTION, AND UNLAWFUL BUSINESS PRACTICES 1 compensatory damages awarded. Wherefore, Plaintiffs pray rcomp atory damages of $5,000,000 2 janc punitive damages in a sum to be determined by the fury at triai 24) Defendants’ conduct in trespassi g upon and disconnecting the gas line owned by 4 Plai