CA Unpub Decisions

A jury convicted defendant Semore of second degree murder. He asserts the evidence was insufficient to convict him as an aider and abettor, and that the trial court erred prejudicially in instructing the jury on aiding and abetting liability as a basis for conviction. We affirm.

Jodi and Jeffrey Pusich are siblings who jointly own rental property that was transferred to them under the terms of their parents’ trust following the death of their last surviving parent. In her capacity as trustee of her parents’ trust, Jodi filed a petition to partition the property and transfer Jeffrey’s share of the sale proceeds to the trust. The probate court denied the petition without prejudice to filing a separate civil action for partition, reasoning that the subject property is no longer owned by the trust.
On appeal from the order denying her petition, Jodi contends the court erred in finding that the property was distributed free and clear of the trust. She argues that the trust retained a contingent future interest in the property in light of the trust’s direction to place Jeffrey’s share of the sale proceeds in the trust upon a sale of the property. We agree with Jodi and shall reverse.

Plaintiffs Mohammed Danesh-Bahreini and Shahnaz Danesh appeal from a judgment dismissing their action against defendants ALAW and ALAW employee Regina Cantrell following the superior court’s sustaining of demurrers by ALAW and Cantrell to plaintiffs’ first amended complaint against defendants JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (Chase), ALAW, and Cantrell. ALAW acted as the foreclosure trustee in an attempted nonjudicial foreclosure on plaintiffs’ San Ramon home and the court found the actions of ALAW and its employee Cantrell in recording a notice of trustee’s sale to be covered by the statutory privileges of Civil Code section 2924, subdivisions (b) and (d), such that the tort action against them was barred. The court allowed some causes of action to continue against Chase, the beneficiary under the Deed of Trust. The parties state the sale was postponed and that to date, no trustee’s sale has been held.

Appellant Raymond Edward Wong (appellant) asserts a number of claims on appeal following his conviction for murder. We affirm.

Plaintiffs Jim Kehoe, John Kehoe, and Mary Petrin filed an action against defendants Michael O’Brien and Joe O’Brien, seeking a partnership dissolution and other remedies. The trial court determined plaintiffs had failed to establish a partnership had been formed in three trucking companies operated by the Kehoes and Michael O’Brien. Jim Kehoe appeals judgment in favor of defendants on plaintiffs’ complaint. Defendant Michael O’Brien appeals from the trial court’s refusal to award him interest on his cross-action against Jim Kehoe for conversion of 12 trailers.

Appellant Welborn Freeman appeals from the trial court’s order denying his petition for writ of administrative mandamus seeking review of respondent California State Teachers’ Retirement System’s (CalSTRS) denial of his claims relating to his retirement benefits. We affirm.

This is the latest appeal in litigation spanning over a decade between condominium unit owners, appellants Larisa Garbar and Michael Rabichev (hereinafter, property owners) and the condominium project’s governing body, respondent Cathedral Hill Tower Condominium Association (hereinafter, Association). In the present appeal, property owners, a married couple, challenge the trial court’s grant of judgment notwithstanding the verdict in favor of the Association after the jury found by special verdict that, one, the Association had created or permitted to exist a condition harmful to health or obstructive to the free use of property so as to interfere with property owners’ use or enjoyment of their condominium unit; two, the Association’s conduct was a substantial factor in causing personal injuries to property owners; and three, property owners were therefore entitled to a total of $280,000 in personal injury damages.

A jury convicted defendant of molesting four boys during a 10-year period in the 1990s. On appeal, defendant challenges all of his convictions on numerous grounds, including insufficiency of the evidence and misinstruction on the definition of masturbation. We affirm.

Joe Martin Rodriguez appeals from a judgment after the trial court reduced one of Rodriguez’s first degree murder convictions to second degree murder. Rodriguez argues the trial court erred by ruling it did not have jurisdiction to reconsider the amount of the restitution fine. The Attorney General agrees. We agree and reverse and remand the matter for the limited purpose of the trial court addressing the issue of whether Rodriguez has the ability to pay the restitution fine. In all other respects, the judgment is affirmed.

Arnold Min Baek appeals from a judgment after a jury convicted him of three robbery offenses. Baek argues the indeterminate abstract of judgment should be corrected. The Attorney General agrees. We affirm the judgment as modified.

We appointed counsel to represent Juan Eric Pena on appeal. Counsel filed a brief that set forth the facts of the case. Counsel did not argue against his client but advised the court he found no issues to argue on his behalf. We gave Pena 30 days to file written argument on his own behalf, which he did.

This is the second time this case has been before us. As set out in our first opinion, HPT IHG-2 Properties Trust v. City of Anaheim (2015) 243 Cal.App.4th 188 (HPT1), defendant City of Anaheim (together with defendant City Council of the City of Anaheim, defendants) issued a conditional use permit (CUP 4153) allowing plaintiffs HPT IHG-2 Properties Trust and IHG Management Maryland (plaintiffs) to develop two hotels. Part of CUP 4153 set out the number of required parking spaces for the development.

In 2012, Wager was injured when the left pedal of her bicycle allegedly snapped off. Wager initiated litigation against The Assembly Team, LLC (Assembly Team), among others, in April 2014, Superior Court of Orange County case No. 30-2014-00718082 (the prior action). Wager alleged Assembly Team negligently assembled her bicycle, thereby causing her injuries. Assembly Team demurred to the complaint as untimely, and the trial court sustained the demurrer without leave to amend. The court entered a final judgment dismissing the action with prejudice.

Appellant Griselda Pena appeals following the denial of her motion to reconsider or dismiss a domestic violence restraining order issued against her under California’s Domestic Violence Prevention Act (DVPA). Appellant contends the court abused its discretion when issuing the restraining order because she did not commit an act of domestic violence. Appellant also contends the court prejudicially erred when it rejected her evidence regarding the incident, offered in the form of police reports. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm.