Taeb VS Mash

RG12642446: Taeb VS Mash 07/09/2026 Hearing on Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens filed by Abbas Mash (Defendant) + CRS# 156713511930 in Department 16

Tentative Ruling - 07/08/2026 Victoria Kolakowski

Defendants Abbas Mash and Niki S, Inc.’s Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens is granted.

I.

Background

In August 2012, Plaintiffs Hamid Taeb and Century Land Corporation recorded a notice of pending action concerning 4101 Todikka Lane in Castro Valley, California with the County of Alameda’s Clerk-Recorder’s Office. (Chung Decl. Supp. Mot. Expunge Lis Pendens Ex. A, June 12, 2026.)

In November 2024, the Court entered its judgment for $1,812,893.40 in favor of Plaintiffs and against Defendants. (Judgment, Nov. 21, 2024 (Chatterjee, J.).)

In January 2026, Defendants posted a $2,745,900.00 bond while the judgment is appealed. (Revised Undertaking App., Jan. 28, 2026.)

In June 2026, Defendants moved to expunge the notice of pendency and for an award of $5,075.00 in attorneys’ fees. (Mot. Expunge Lis Pendens, June 12, 2026.) Defendants partly argued that this action no longer affected the title to the Todikka property as the Court awarded damages and did not quiet title to the Todikka property. (Mem. Supp. Mot. Expunge Lis Pendens 4:15–5:2, June 12, 2026.) Defendants also argued that they are entitled to an award of attorneys’ fees as Plaintiffs should have voluntarily withdrawn their notice of pendency without the Court’s intervention. (Id. 5:16–23.)

II.

Discussion

The Court finds that this action no longer involves a real property claim and the $2,745,900.00 appellate bond adequate protects Plaintiffs’ interests. The Court deems Plaintiffs’ failure to oppose as conceding this issue.

The Court finds that an award of attorneys’ fees would be unjust where Defendants inexplicably rushed to expunge the notice of pendency and further meet and confer efforts would have likely resolved this issue. Here, the Court issued its final statement of decision in August 2023 finding that Plaintiffs’ quiet title action was moot (Final Stmt. Decision, Aug. 30, 2023) and the Court issued its Judgment in November 2024 (Judgment). Then, Defendants posted their appellate bond in January 2026. (Revised Undertaking App.)

Defendants initially requested Plaintiffs withdraw their notice of pendency in late March 2026. (Chung Decl. Ex. F at 5.) Defendants followed up with Plaintiffs over a month later, on June 4, 2026 (id. at 4); Plaintiffs responded that same day stating they were amenable to withdrawing their notice of pendency (id. at 3–4); and that same day at 7:30 p.m., Defendants requested a response by the following day (id. at 1). RG12642446: Taeb VS Mash 07/09/2026 Hearing on Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens filed by Abbas Mash (Defendant) + CRS# 156713511930 in Department 16 After not hearing a response and not following up, Defendants then filed their Motion the following week. (See Mot.)