Search anything: case name, case number, motion type, judge, or party

1-25 of 10,097 results

BEE INVESTMENT, INC., A CORPORATION VS LYNN KIM

On October 21, 2019, Kim answered and filed a cross-complaint against BII, Kenny Chung (“Chung”), Joon Jung (“Jung”), and Shi Young Lim (“Lim”). The Cross-Complaint stated five causes of action for 1) violation of Real Estate Commissioner’s Regulation 2725; 2) violation of Bus. & Prof. Code section 10176 and 10177; 3) fraud of material facts (in conspiracy); 4) abuse of process (in conspiracy); and 5) negligence. The Cross-Complaint generally states that the second agreement was illegal and unconscionable.

  • Hearing

    Jan 30, 2020

POLONIA, LILLIANA VS MISSION CITY LIGHTS ASSOCIATES

Defendants Mission City Lights Associates and Shi Young Lim’s unopposed Motions for Judgment on the Pleadings are GRANTED. Background This is an action for forcible detainer and forcible entry arising from Defendants’ allegedly unlawful possession of Plaintiff’s apartment. Plaintiff claims Defendants unlawfully took possession of Plaintiff’s premises and assets. Defendants Mission City Lights Associates and Shi Young Lim have filed separate motions for judgment on the pleadings.

  • Hearing

    Feb 15, 2017

  • Judge

    Elaine Lu or Yolanda Orozco

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

UN A SOHN ET AL VS MICHELLE SIM ET AL

Young lim and the law firm park & lim’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for plaintiffs un a. sohn, steve sohn, and oyang immigration services, apc Attorney S. Young Lim and the law firm Park & Lim’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for Plaintiffs Un A. Sohn, Steve Sohn, and Oyang Immigration Services, APC is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Discussion Cal. Code of Civ.

  • Hearing

    Sep 26, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

HONGYU SHI VS GANG HU

Hu, in his 3/17/18 First Amended Cross-Complaint, alleges in relevant part that “TAO SHI and HONGYU SHI also instructed HU to find a new attorney to handle the L-1. TAO SHI and HONGYU SHI eventually hired attorney Alan Wang and Melanie Yang to process TAO SHI and HONGYU SHI’s L1 application. Again, the retainer, payment and communication were between the attorneys and TAO SHI and HONGYU SHI directly.” (FACC, ¶ 42).

  • Hearing

    Aug 24, 2018

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

LESLIE BLAKENEY VS YOUNG I LIM ET AL

Young I. Lim, et al., Defendants. Case No.: BC631155 Hearing Date: August 14, 2018 [TENTATIVE] order RE: defendants’ motion for an order compelling PLAINTIFF to submit to physical examination and pay Monetary Sanctions This action arises out of a motor vehicle accident. Defendants Young I. Lim, Connie H. Lim, and Sung K. Lim (collectively “Defendants”) move to compel Plaintiff Leslie Blakeney (“Plaintiff”) to submit to a physical examination and for an order imposing sanctions.

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2018

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Auto

  • Judge Elaine Lu
  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

SEVEN BUBBLES INC. VS MENGHAN LI, ET AL.

Shi only) Breach of Contract (v. Shi only) Fraud (v. Shi only) Conversion (v.

  • Hearing

    Jan 10, 2020

Q E CONSTRUCTION INC VS ZHENGJIANG

Cross-Complainant Shi Zhengjian's eighth cause of action fails to allege that Plaintiff knew of the existence of third-party economic relationships that would be harmed by Plaintiff's actions. Thus, Plaintiff's demurrer as to Cross-Complainant Shi Zhengjian's eighth cause of action is SUSTAINED. Cross-Complainant Shi Zhengjian, and only Cross-Complainant Shi Zhengjian, is granted ten (10) days leave to amend the Cross-Complaint.

  • Hearing

    Dec 05, 2016

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

Q E CONSTRUCTION INC VS ZHENGJIANG

Cross-Complainant Shi Zhengjian's eighth cause of action fails to allege that Plaintiff knew of the existence of third-party economic relationships that would be harmed by Plaintiff's actions. Thus, Plaintiff's demurrer as to Cross-Complainant Shi Zhengjian's eighth cause of action is SUSTAINED. Cross-Complainant Shi Zhengjian, and only Cross-Complainant Shi Zhengjian, is granted ten (10) days leave to amend the Cross-Complaint.

  • Hearing

    Dec 05, 2016

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

YOUNG K LIM VS OK JOO KIM

DEMURRER TO CROSS-COMPLAINT (CCP § 430.10) TENTATIVE RULING: Cross-Defendants Young K. Lim and Jin Ree’s Demurrer to Cross-Complaint is CONTINUED TO FEB. 4, 2019 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 94. ANALYSIS: I. Background After Plaintiff Young K. Lim (“Lim”) initiated this action against Defendant Ok Joo Kim (“Kim”) to recover on a check with insufficient funds, Kim filed a Cross-Complaint against Lim and Jin Ree (“Ree”) on July 12, 2019.

  • Hearing

    Oct 29, 2019

  • Judge

    James E. Blancarte or Serena R. Murillo

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

LESLIE BLAKENEY VS YOUNG I LIM ET AL

Young I. Lim, et al., Defendants. Case No.: BC631155 Hearing Date: September 17, 2018 [TENTATIVE] order RE: defendants’ motion for an order compelling PLAINTIFF to submit to physical examination and pay Monetary Sanctions; Plaintiff’s request for sanctions This action arises out of a motor vehicle accident. Defendants Young I. Lim, Connie H. Lim, and Sung K.

  • Hearing

    Sep 17, 2018

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Auto

  • Judge Elaine Lu
  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

SEVEN BUBBLES INC. VS MENGHAN LI, ET AL.

Plaintiff alleges that Zhexin Shi (“Shi”) agreed to put in $50,000.00 for investment in Plaintiff. Plaintiff alleges that Bin Fu, one of Plaintiff’s initial investors, loaned Shi the $50,000.00. Shi was recognized as owning 30% of Plaintiff, with the understanding that Shi needed to pay the $50,000.00 capital out of her own pocket later. Plaintiff alleges that Shi served as Plaintiff’s Chief Executive Officer from its inception until the termination of her employment in April 2017.

  • Hearing

    Aug 09, 2019

Q E CONSTRUCTION INC VS ZHENGJIANG

Cross-Complainant Shi Zhengjian's eighth cause of action fails to allege that Plaintiff knew of the existence of third-party economic relationships that would be harmed by Plaintiff's actions. Thus, Plaintiff's demurrer as to Cross-Complainant Shi Zhengjian's eighth cause of action is SUSTAINED. Cross-Complainant Shi Zhengjian, and only Cross-Complainant Shi Zhengjian, is granted ten (10) days leave to amend the Cross-Complaint.

  • Hearing

    Dec 05, 2016

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

Q E CONSTRUCTION INC VS ZHENGJIANG

Cross-Complainant Shi Zhengjian's eighth cause of action fails to allege that Plaintiff knew of the existence of third-party economic relationships that would be harmed by Plaintiff's actions. Thus, Plaintiff's demurrer as to Cross-Complainant Shi Zhengjian's eighth cause of action is SUSTAINED. Cross-Complainant Shi Zhengjian, and only Cross-Complainant Shi Zhengjian, is granted ten (10) days leave to amend the Cross-Complaint.

  • Hearing

    Dec 05, 2016

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

DAVID WEI LIN ET AL VS DEYUN SHI

Discontented with the statutory division of assets, Yujing sought to control the entire marital property in the United States and China through the incarceration of Shi. SAC ¶10. From this goal sprung a plot where Yujing “created and facilitated circumstances” to incarcerate Shi by telling Shi that her brother, Plaintiff David Lin, was the root of all of their marital problems, knowing that Shi would violently attack David on December 30, 2015, as documented by the Arcadia Police Department.

  • Hearing

    May 24, 2019

SEVEN BUBBLES INC. VS MENGHAN LI, ET AL.

Shi only) Breach of Contract (v. Shi only) Fraud (v. Shi only) Conversion (v.

  • Hearing

    Oct 10, 2019

YOUNG K LIM VS OK JOO KIM

DEMURRER (CCP § 430.41) TENTATIVE RULING: Cross-Defendants Young K. Lim and Jin Ree’s Demurrer to Cross-Complaint is CONTINUED to MARCH13, 2020 at 10:30 a.m. in Department 25, SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE. AT LEAST 16 COURT DAYS PRIOR TO THE NEW HEARING DATE, CROSS-DEFENDANTS MUST FILE A SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION CORRECTING THE DEFICIENCIES DISCUSSED HEREIN. FAILURE TO DO SO MAY RESULT IN THE DEMURRER BEING PLACED OFF CALENDAR OR DENIED. ANALYSIS: I. Background On April 24, 2019, Plaintiff Young K.

  • Hearing

    Feb 04, 2020

  • Judge

    James E. Blancarte

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

SHUSTAK REYNOLDS & PARTNERS PC VS CINDY SHU-WAY SHI

Shi, and Ms. Shi signed the agreement without any changes. It was already signed by Mr. Shustak when it was sent to Ms. Shi. Ms. Shi then signed the agreement in Cupertino, in the County of Santa Clara and sent it back to Mr. Shustak. (Shi Decl, ¶8, 9, 10 and Ex. A.) The complaint attaches the agreement as Exhibit A. It states on the last page that it was signed by Erwin J. Shustak, and below that it was "AGREED TO AND ACCEPTED: Cindy Shu-Way Shi."

  • Hearing

    May 02, 2017

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

SEVEN BUBBLES INC. VS MENGHAN LI, ET AL.

Shi only) Breach of Contract (v. Shi only) Fraud (v. Shi only) Conversion (v.

  • Hearing

    Oct 10, 2019

DAVID WEI LIN ET AL VS DEYUN SHI

DEYUN SHI , et al.; Defendants. Case No.: BC611026 Hearing Date: December 10, 2018 [TENTATIVE] order RE: Demurrer & motion to strike TO THE complaint Background Plaintiffs David Wei Lin (“David Lin”) and Vicki Wenchih Huang (“Plaintiffs”) filed a complaint on February 22, 2016, asserting a single cause of action for wrongful death, alleging that Deyun Shi (“Defendant Shi”) murdered their two children, William Davidson Lin and Anthony Davidson Lin (“Decedents”), on January 22, 2016.

  • Hearing

    Feb 06, 2019

(NO CASE NAME AVAILABLE)

Shi only) Breach of Contract (v. Shi only) Fraud (v. Shi only) Conversion (v.

  • Hearing

    Nov 22, 2019

SHI VS LEE

Defendants next argue that premarital communications between Shi and Crespo might be relevant to Shi’s standing to bring this suit, i.e., Shi had testified that the investment was funded through other sources. This argument lacks merit. Plaintiffs allege a failed joint venture between Shi, Lin and Lee in which they agreed to form an LLC to purchase and hold the subject property. Regardless of the source of Shi’s investment, Plaintiffs allege the agreement was between Shi, Lin and Lee.

  • Hearing

    Oct 30, 2019

ALATTING INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL. VS BAOHUA CAO

During the lunch, Phoenix Shi did not speak about any documents, such as a summons, complaint or otherwise, and did not have any documents on his person. (Id.) Ren does not believe Phoenix Shi could have given or served any documents on Cao without Ren’s knowledge at or around 1:30 p.m. that afternoon because Ren arrived at the lunch meeting before Phoenix Shi and left after Phoenix Shi, and was continuously with Cao from approximately 1:25 p.m. until approximately 2:15 p.m. on July 2, 2019. (Id., ¶5.)

  • Hearing

    Jan 03, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

CREDITORS ADJUSTMENT BUREAU VS ALPHA ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION INC

Plaintiff's unopposed motion for terminating sanctions against defendants Alpha Engineering and Construction, Inc. and John Lim, aka Young Ho Kim, aka John Youngho Lim dba Alpha Construction & Engineering Co. is granted. Defendants have failed to provide further responses to plaintiff's first set of special interrogatories, request for production of documents, and request for admissions as ordered by this court on December 7, 2018. (ROA, 64.)

  • Hearing

    Jun 27, 2019

  • Type

    Collections

  • Sub Type

    Collections

CREDITORS ADJUSTMENT BUREAU VS ALPHA ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION INC

Plaintiff's unopposed motion for terminating sanctions against defendants Alpha Engineering and Construction, Inc. and John Lim, aka Young Ho Kim, aka John Youngho Lim dba Alpha Construction & Engineering Co. is granted. Defendants have failed to provide further responses to plaintiff's first set of special interrogatories, request for production of documents, and request for admissions as ordered by this court on December 7, 2018. (ROA, 64.)

  • Hearing

    Jun 27, 2019

  • Type

    Collections

  • Sub Type

    Collections

CREDITORS ADJUSTMENT BUREAU VS ALPHA ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION INC

Plaintiff's unopposed motion for terminating sanctions against defendants Alpha Engineering and Construction, Inc. and John Lim, aka Young Ho Kim, aka John Youngho Lim dba Alpha Construction & Engineering Co. is granted. Defendants have failed to provide further responses to plaintiff's first set of special interrogatories, request for production of documents, and request for admissions as ordered by this court on December 7, 2018. (ROA, 64.)

  • Hearing

    Jun 27, 2019

  • Type

    Collections

  • Sub Type

    Collections

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 400     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.