DecisionDepot
California Legal Research
All cases
2025-01487294·orange·ComplexCivil·Motion - Pro Hac Vice
CONTINUED

Andrawes Husary vs. Shahidi

Pro Hac Vice

Hearing date
May 14, 2026
Department
CX102
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
Jul 23, 2026

Motion type

Other

Parties

PlaintiffAndrawes Husary
DefendantShahidi

Ruling

The Court also does not find persuasive Goldman’s newly discovered evidence relating to Medford LLCs’ fee payments to Tucker Ellis. This action is one for the enforcement of Goldman’s judgment against LBG REC based on LBG REC’s assets. The fee payments in question were not made by LBG REC but by the Medford LLCs. Goldman has not demonstrated that the assets used by the Medford LLCs were LBG REC’s assets such that they are subject to satisfaction of Goldman’s judgment against LBG REC. Ultimately, Goldman’s claims that Lundin and Beiswenger are mismanaging the Medford LLCs by allegedly improperly paying their personal attorneys’ fees to Tucker Ellis are issues for disposition in the related California Action, not in this enforcement action.

At bottom, Goldman has not produced sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the drastic, harsh, and costly remedy of appointing a receiver is necessary under the circumstances.

Accordingly, Goldman’s receiver motion is DENIED.

LBG REC shall give notice of all of the above. 109 Andrawes Motion – Pro Hac Vice Husary vs. Shahidi The Court previously conditionally approved counsel’s application to appear Pro Hac Vice but ordered an amended application upon 2025- learning that the sponsoring attorney had passed away. Moving 01487294 party has so far failed to comply with the Court’s order. The Court therefore continues this matter to the date of the rescheduled motion for stay and CMC with the proviso that the Court will consider whether to issue an amended order denying counsel’s PHV application for failure to file the amended application. Moving party is ordered to file the amended application 10 days before the continued hearing date of 07/23/2026 at 02:00 PM in Department CX102.

Clerk to give notice 110 Sandoval vs. Motion for Final Approval re Class and PAGA Settlement Cybex Security Solutions, LLC Plaintiff Vicente Sandoval’s Motion for Final Approval of Class Action and PAGA Settlement is CONDITIONALLY GRANTED, pending the resolution of the 2024- issues identified below. 01398109 This is a putative wage-and-hour class action and PAGA matter. On May 8, 2024, Plaintiff Vicente Sandoval, as an individual and on behalf of all others similarly situated (“Plaintiff”), filed a Class Action Complaint against Defendants Cybex Security Solutions, LLC and Sonitrol Orange County, LLC (“Defendants”). The Complaint asserts seven (7) causes of action for various violations of the Labor Code’s wage-and-hour provisions and unfair business practices.

On July 15, 2024, as a matter of right, Plaintiff filed the operative First Amended Class and Representative Action Complaint (“FAC”) adding a claim for PAGA penalties. Defendants answered on September 9, 2024.

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…

Extracted by Gemini Flash from the ruling text. Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.

Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities

Ask about this ruling

Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”

Powered by Gemini Flash Lite. Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Source

Share