(1) Motion for Sanctions (2) Motion for Sanctions
Tentative Ruling:
(1) Defendant Paymon Bidari’s Motion for Sanctions pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 128.5 is DENIED as follows.
The Court finds Defendant BIDARI failed to meet his burden of establishing that the filing of the First Amended Complaint which included the conversion cause of action was frivolous. “A determination of frivolousness requires a finding the complained of conduct was ‘totally and completely without merit’ (§ 128.5, subd. (b)(2)), that is, ‘any reasonable attorney would agree such motion is totally devoid of merit.’ [Citation.]’” (Moore v. Shaw (2004) 116 Cal. App. 4th 182, 199.)
Here, when Plaintiff sought leave to amend his Complaint, Defendant GUZMAN had testified at his deposition in June 2019 that he had used $16k of money belonging to Plaintiff to pay the $16k retainer. (See Exh. C, 96:2-22.) Whether or not Defendant BIDARI “knew” the retainer money came from money set aside by Defendant GUZMAN
Hearing Date
March 18, 2021
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
(1) Motion for Sanctions (2) Motion for Sanctions
Tentative Ruling:
(1) Defendant Paymon Bidari’s Motion for Sanctions pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 128.5 is DENIED as follows.
The Court finds Defendant BIDARI failed to meet his burden of establishing that the filing of the First Amended Complaint which included the conversion cause of action was frivolous. “A determination of frivolousness requires a finding the complained of conduct was ‘totally and completely without merit’ (§ 128.5, subd. (b)(2)), that is, ‘any reasonable attorney would agree such motion is totally devoid of merit.’ [Citation.]’” (Moore v. Shaw (2004) 116 Cal. App. 4th 182, 199.)
Here, when Plaintiff sought leave to amend his Complaint, Defendant GUZMAN had testified at his deposition in June 2019 that he had used $16k of money belonging to Plaintiff to pay the $16k retainer. (See Exh. C, 96:2-22.) Whether or not Defendant BIDARI “knew” the retainer money came from money set aside by Defendant GUZMAN