Howard L Abselet v. Alliance Lending Group, Inc. et al

Filing 460

***DOCUMENT STRICKEN*** SEE TEXT ENTRY BELOW - DE 461***** 6/26/2012 (sr).

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 MARK A. NEUBAUER (SBN 73728) REBECCA EDELSON (SBN 150464) STEPTOE & JOHNSON LLP 2121 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 2800 Los Angeles, California 90067-5052 Telephone: (310) 734-3200 Facsimile:(310) 734-3300 Email: Email: Attorneys for Plaintiff HOWARD L. ABSELET 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 HOWARD L. ABSELET, an individual, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Case No.: CV11-00815 JFW (JEMx) Assigned to Hon. John F. Walter JUDGMENT vs. ALLIANCE LENDING GROUP, INC., a California corporation; SOLYMAN YASHOUAFAR, an individual; MASSOUD AARON YASHOUAFAR, an individual, HAMID JOSEPH NOURMAND, an individual, MALIBU RECONVEYANCE, LLC, a California limited liability company, VAN NUYS PLYWOOD, LLC, a California limited liability company, SODA PARTNERS, LLC, a California limited liability company, and DOES 1-10, inclusive Complaint Filed: 1/27/11 Pretrial Conf. Date:1/27/12, 2/10/12 Trial Date: Vacated Defendants. AND RELATED CROSS-CLAIMS. 24 25 26 27 28 [PROPOSED] JUDGMENT Doc. # CC-261076 v.1 1 Plaintiff Howard L. Abselet (“Abselet”) having filed his operative Second 2 Amended Complaint against Defendants Hamid Joseph Nourmand (“Nourmand”), 3 Alliance Lending Group, Inc. (“Alliance”), Solyman Yashouafar (“S-Yashouafar”) 4 and Massoud Aaron Yashouafar (“M-Yashouafar”), Malibu Reconveyance, LLC 5 (“Malibu”), Van Nuys Plywood, LLC (“Van Nuys”), and Soda Partners, LLC 6 (“Soda”), Malibu and Van Nuys having filed Cross-Complaints against one 7 another, and Malibu having filed a Third Party Complaint against Third Party 8 Defendant LPS Agency Sales and Posting(“LPS”), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, 9 ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that: 10 Plaintiff’s Claims: 11 The following of Plaintiff Abselet’s Claims were by stipulation dismissed 12 without prejudice against Alliance, S-Yashouafar and M-Yashouafar (collectively, 13 the “Borrower Defendants”): 14 Claim 1: Breach of Contract. 15 Claim 2: Enforcement of Personal Guaranty. 16 Claim 3: Money Had and Received. 17 Claim 4: Money Loaned. 18 Claim 8: Negligent Misrepresentation. 19 20 The following of Plaintiff Abselet’s Claims were by stipulation dismissed without prejudice against Malibu: 21 Claim 6: Wrongful Foreclosure. 22 Claim 7: Declaratory Relief. 23 Claim 9: Negligence. 24 25 The following of Plaintiff Abselet’s Claims were by stipulation dismissed with prejudice against Nourmand: 26 Claim 5: Fraud. 27 Claim 8: Negligent Misrepresentation. 28 Claim 10: Breach of Fiduciary Duty. 1 JUDGMENT Doc. # CC-261076 v.1 Claim 11: Professional Negligence. 1 2 The following of Plaintiff Abselet’s Claims were adjudicated against 3 Plaintiff Abselet pursuant to Van Nuys’ and Soda’s motions for summary 4 judgment: 5 Claim 6: Wrongful Foreclosure. 6 Claim 7: Declaratory Relief. 7 8 9 The following of Plaintiff Abselet’s Claims were dismissed as moot: Claim 12: Judicial Foreclosure. Based on the stipulation of Plaintiff Abselet, Nourmand and the Borrower 10 Defendants, Plaintiff Abselet is the prevailing party as against the Borrower 11 Defendants, and the Borrower Defendants shall pay Abselet $450,000.00 (four 12 hundred fifty thousand dollars) as costs and attorneys’ fees provided that if any of 13 the Borrower Defendants defaults on any of their obligations to Plaintiff Abselet 14 under the terms of their Settlement Agreement with him, that amount shall increase 15 to $800,000.00 (eight hundred thousand dollars). 16 Plaintiff Abselet shall take nothing else by way of his Second Amended 17 Complaint, however the Court shall retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the 18 Settlement Agreement between Abselet, Nourmand, and the Borrower Defendants 19 and the Court shall reopen this action for that purpose. 20 Nourmand, the Borrower Defendants, and Malibu have waived any rights to 21 appeal this judgment. However, Plaintiff Abselet reserves rights to appeal the 22 judgment as to Van Nuys and Soda. 23 Malibu’s and Van Nuys’ Cross-Claims: 24 Malibu’s and Van Nuys’ Cross-Claims against one another were by 25 26 27 stipulation dismissed without prejudice. Malibu and Van Nuys shall take nothing by way of their Cross-Complaints against one another. 28 2 JUDGMENT Doc. # CC-261076 v.1 1 Malibu’s Third Party Claims Against LPS: 2 Malibu’s Third Party Complaint against LPS was by stipulation dismissed 3 without prejudice. 4 Malibu shall take nothing by way of its Third Party Complaint against LPS. 5 SO ORDERED. 6 7 8 9 10 Dated: June 26, 2012 JOHN F. WALTER UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 JUDGMENT Doc. # CC-261076 v.1

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?