CA Unpub Decisions

Aaron I. appeals juvenile court orders, challenging his commitment to the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Division of Juvenile Facilities (DJF), formerly known as the California Youth Authority. He seeks a new dispositional hearing on the ground the court abused its discretion by ordering DJF commitment. He also contends the courts written dispositional and commitment orders do not accurately reflect the courts rulings regarding credit for time served and the maximum term of confinement. Court agree with appellant that the juvenile court should correct its written orders, but otherwise affirm.

The dispute leading to this appeal involved a business venture operated by Zareh Narghizian and Luciano Fabbio where luxury automobiles were purchased by the business and then sold. In a complaint by respondent Fabbio against appellants Zareh and Aida Narghizian and a cross complaint filed by the Narghizians against Fabbio, the parties accused each other of diverting profits and essentially cheating each other. The jury awarded $310,000 in compensatory damages and $290,000 in punitive damages to Fabbio for Zarehs fraud and conversion in taking Fabbios money in 2001 and using it as partial payment on an unimproved lot on Mt. Olympus in Los Angeles. The trial court denied the Narghizians an accounting of the business affairs; granted a directed verdict in favor of Fabbio on the cross complaint; and imposed a constructive trust in favor of Fabbio on the real property purchased by the Narghizians aided by a third party (Amirvand), in part with the diverted funds. The Narghizians were ordered to provide a grant deed as well as a quitclaim deed to Fabbio. The Narghizians appeal the judgment and the order. Court affirm the award of compensatory damages and imposition of constructive trust on the Mt. Olympus property; reverse the award of punitive damages, the failure to order an accounting, and the directed verdict on the cross complaint; and remand to the trial court for further proceedings.

Plaintiff Gregory Castillo, M.D., appeals from a summary judgment entered in favor of defendant Community Medical Group of the West Valley, Inc. (No. B185657). Plaintiff also appeals from an award of attorney fees against him (No. B187734). Court consolidate the two appeals for purpose of argument and decision. Court affirm the summary judgment and the award of attorney fees.

A husband quitclaimed his interest in community real property to his wife but (30 years later) claimed during the parties marital dissolution proceedings that he had not understood the transaction. The family court rejected the husbands claim and awarded the property to the wife, but ordered her to reimburse the husband for his pre quitclaim interest in the property. Both parties appeal. Court affirm the judgment insofar as it confirms the asset as the wifes separate property but reverse insofar as it requires her to reimburse the husband.

Stephen Harrell appeals from the judgment entered following a jury trial in which he was convicted of possession of cocaine and misdemeanor possession of a smoking device and marijuana. In a bifurcated bench trial, he was found to have sustained prior felony convictions, including one under the Three Strikes law. Defendant contends that the trial court prejudicially erred in ordering that he submit to a physical examination and instructing the jury on his refusal to do so, and in reconsidering its original finding that the evidence was insufficient to prove the prior felony convictions. Court affirm.

Thomas Ramos, Jr., Virginia Ramos, John Ramos, Larry Ramos, Manuel Martinez, and the Estate of Margaret Ramos, deceased by Thomas Ramos, Jr., as administrator, appeal from the court order denying relief from the requirements of the Tort Claims Act. (Gov. Code 810 et seq.) Appellants contend the court abused its discretion when it denied them relief. Court affirm.

Defendant Regina Latrice Gordon appeals from a judgment of conviction following a jury trial in which she was found guilty of assault with a deadly weapon and vandalism. She raises a single issue on appeal: Did the trial court err in excluding evidence of the victims violent character offered to support Gordons contention she stabbed the victim in self defense during a brawl the victim initiated Court conclude that even if the court erred in excluding the evidence Gordon has failed to show prejudice. Therefore, Court affirm the judgment.

Benecity, Inc., Andrea Rossetto, Yasmina Berriche, and M. Ziyed MBazaia (collectively, appellants) appealed from an order denying their petition to compel arbitration of Monica Yeroushalmis claims against appellants, including claims for employment discrimination under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) (Govt. Code, 12900 et seq.) and for wrongful discharge. Appellants contended that the trial court erred in finding the arbitration provision in Benecitys employment agreement unconscionable and ruling that the unconscionable terms should not be severed. Appellants Berriche and MBazaia filed an appeal on March 23, 2006; appellants Benecity, Inc. and Andrea Rossetto separately filed an appeal on March 24, 2006.

This case came before us for oral argument on March 21, 2007. At that time, due to the near certainty of additional appeals if the parties did not settle and the likely substantial court costs relative to the amount at stake in the case, we recommended that the parties attempt to settle the case and request dismissal of the appeals. They agreed to do so. We continued oral arguments twice while the parties worked out a settlement. On July 12, 2007 and July 17, 2007, in accordance with the terms of their settlement agreement, the parties filed joint notices of settlement and requests for dismissal of the appeals in which the parties stipulated to the settlement of all issues between all parties. In accordance with this request, Court dismiss the appeals.

Karen Daily sued Robert E. Racine for legal malpractice, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, and fraud. Racines demurrer was sustained without leave to amend and Daily (in propria persona) appealed. We affirmed. (Daily v. Racine (Feb. 23, 2007, B186944) [nonpub. opn.].) Meanwhile, Racine had moved for an order obligating Daily to pay his attorneys fees, contending Dailys legal malpractice suit was an action based upon a contract within the meaning of an attorneys fee provision in his retainer agreement. The trial court agreed, and ordered Daily to pay $19,386.60 to Racine for his fees and costs. Daily (once again appearing in propria persona) appeals. Court reverse the attorney fee award but affirm the cost award.

Rodrick Harris appeals from the judgment entered following a jury trial in which he was convicted of first degree murder with personal and intentional discharge of a firearm, and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. In a bifurcated court trial, defendant was found to have suffered two prior felony convictions, one of which qualified under the Three Strikes law. Defendant contends that the trial court erred in permitting evidence of gang activity and witnesses fear of testifying, in allowing use of preliminary hearing testimony, and in denying his request to exclude gruesome photographs of the victim. Court affirm.

Plaintiffs Seung Lee and Ki Lee appeal from a judgment dismissing with prejudice their lawsuit against defendants RDR Properties, RDR Living Trust, and Robert Dale Resnick for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing arising out of their commercial lease transaction with defendants. Court affirm.

Defendant Jose Alberto Delgadillo chose to represent himself in a jury trial in which he was charged with thirteen felonies including burglary, battery, robbery and intimidating witnesses. The jury convicted him of seven of the counts. On appeal he argues his convictions must be reversed because he did not knowingly and intelligently waive his right to counsel, and he was denied reasonable access to the jail law library. Court find the record does not support Delgadillos contentions and therefore Court affirm the judgment.

Rudy Casas was convicted of two counts of robbery, with true findings on allegations that he had suffered two prior serious felonies that also qualified as strikes and served one prior prison term. (Pen. Code, 211, 667, subds. (a), (b)-(i), 667.5, subd. (b).) He was sentenced to state prison for a term of 60 years to life. Casas appeals, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence as to one of the robbery counts and contending there were instructional and evidentiary errors. Court affirm.

Gerardo Soto was convicted of one count of making a criminal threat (with a weapon use allegation found true), two counts of attempting to burn a structure, and one count of arson. He was sentenced to state prison for a term of five years, four months. Soto appeals, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence in support of the criminal threat count, and claiming there were instructional and sentencing errors. Court affirm.