$2.4 Million Judgment Was Upheld by the Court of Appeals

Share Article

Joseph D. Curd, attorney with Curd, Galindo & Smith, LLP Announced Today that His Clients’ $2.4 Million Judgment Was Upheld by the Court of Appeals.

The Court of Appeals of the State of California Second Appellate District, in the case entitled B Five Corp v. Morris et al Case No. B220616 affirmed the $2.4 million judgment.

On March 7, 2011 a three justice panel issued an appellate decision upholding Mr. Curd’s clients’ $2.4 Million judgment against Micromark.

Mr. Curd’s business client, B Five Corp. dba Bobo’s Burgers, operated a restaurant (http://www.bobosburgers.com) and a Lucy’s Laundrymart in a building owned by defendant/landlord Micromark International. The businesses (part of a successful chain) were located in a retail center at 13651 Foothill Blvd., Sylmar, California.

The businesses were destroyed in a fire on August 5, 2004. The lease required Micromark to repair the property and to maintain hazard and fire insurance. Micromark did neither, and Mr. Curd’s clients sued for loss of their businesses. Mr. Curd’s clients prevailed in the lawsuit and were awarded a $2.4 million judgment against Micromark.

The real property owned by Micromark was free of liens, so in an attempt to prevent B Five Corp. from collecting on the judgment, Micromark executed promissory notes in favor of Micromark’s attorney for $500,000.00, and in favor of their sole shareholder for $200,000.00. They recorded these liens against the property before the judgment could be recorded. Mr. Curd’s clients immediately filed suit again, Superior Court Los Angeles Case No. BC385746, this time for fraudulent conveyance and to vacate the liens. After a trial on the fraudulent conveyance cause of action, Superior Court Judge Holly E. Kendig ruled that the liens incurred were made solely to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors, citing Cal. Civil Code Section 3439.04 et seq and entered judgment in favor of Mr. Curd’s clients, canceling the liens.

Micromark filed an appeal. The Court of Appeal said Micromark and its attorney made the “astounding” argument that the $500,000 note to the attorney was not an attempt to hinder, delay or defraud Mr. Curd’s clients from collecting on their judgment but was “rather to retain an attorney to provide necessary legal services.” Justice Flier of the California Court of Appeals 2nd District, wrote the opinion upholding the lower court’s ruling that the liens were recorded as part of Micromark’s intent to keep the subject real property from Mr. Curd’s clients, and Micromark knowingly sought advice on how to keep B Five Corp from obtaining the property.

Mr. Curd’s clients have now taken title to the retail center free and clear of liens.
CURD, GALINDO & SMITH, LLP is a civil business litigation firm that represents corporate, real estate and professional clients of all sizes in their business transactions, and those who have been seriously injured or have lost a family member due to an accident, defective product, police misconduct or negligence. The law firm has recovered millions of dollars for its thousands of clients since 1995 by winning complex and challenging business, commercial and real estate disputes, death and injury cases involving police misconduct, traffic collisions, work place injuries and defective products, including defective automobiles, against some of the world's largest companies and governmental agencies. Mr. Curd specializes in business, commercial and real estate transactions and dispute resolution.

# # #

Share article on social media or email:

View article via:

Pdf Print

Contact Author

Joseph D. Curd