Superior Court of California
County of Los Angeles
Department 50
JOHN DOE, Plaintiff, vs. JOEL F. TAMRAZ, et al.
Defendants. Case No.: BC 618575
Hearing Date: November 8, 2016
Hearing Time: 8:30 a.m.
[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE:
DEFENDANTS’ DEMURRER TO COMPLAINT
Background
Plaintiff John Doe (“Plaintiff”) filed this action on April 29, 2016 against Defendants Joel F. Tamraz (“Tamraz”) and Lisa M. McClure (“McClure”) (jointly, “Defendants”). The Complaint alleges the following: On or about November 20, 2015, McClure, by and through her attorney Tamraz, filed a lawsuit in Los Angeles Superior Court (the “Lawsuit”). (Complaint ¶10.) Attached to the complaint were two exhibits containing sexually explicit text messages and a single frontal nude photograph of Plaintiff depicting his genitalia. (Id.) The text messages and the photograph (jointly referred to in the Complaint as the “Messages”) were inadvertently sent to McClure and were intended for Plaintiff’s wife. (Complaint ¶11.)
Hearing Date
November 08, 2016
Type
Infliction of Emotional Distress (General Jurisdiction)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Superior Court of California
County of Los Angeles
Department 50
JOHN DOE, Plaintiff, vs. JOEL F. TAMRAZ, et al.
Defendants. Case No.: BC 618575
Hearing Date: November 8, 2016
Hearing Time: 8:30 a.m.
[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE:
DEFENDANTS’ DEMURRER TO COMPLAINT
Background
Plaintiff John Doe (“Plaintiff”) filed this action on April 29, 2016 against Defendants Joel F. Tamraz (“Tamraz”) and Lisa M. McClure (“McClure”) (jointly, “Defendants”). The Complaint alleges the following: On or about November 20, 2015, McClure, by and through her attorney Tamraz, filed a lawsuit in Los Angeles Superior Court (the “Lawsuit”). (Complaint ¶10.) Attached to the complaint were two exhibits containing sexually explicit text messages and a single frontal nude photograph of Plaintiff depicting his genitalia. (Id.) The text messages and the photograph (jointly referred to in the Complaint as the “Messages”) were inadvertently sent to McClure and were intended for Plaintiff’s wife. (Complaint ¶11.)