Adelaida T. Quingco, et al. v. Lawrence Malicdem, et al.

Hon. Teresa A. Beaudet Judge, Los Angeles Superior Court

Superior Court of California County of Los Angeles Department 508 ADELAIDA T. QUINGCO, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. LAWRENCE MALICDEM, et al., Defendants. | Case No.: |

| | Hearing Date: | August 26, 2026 | | Hearing Time: 8:30 a.m. [TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: PLAINTIFFS ADELAIDA T. QUINGCO AND NICHOLAS ALFONSO'S DEMURRER TO DEFENDANT LAWRENCE MALICDEM'S CROSS-COMPLAINT | | AND RELATED CROSS-ACTION | | Background On December 1, 2025, Plaintiffs Adelaida T. Quingco and Nicholas Alfonso (jointly, "Plaintiffs") filed this action against Defendants Lawrence Malicdem and LJM Holdings LLC (jointly, "Defendants"), alleging seven causes of action for (1) breach of contract; (2) common counts; (3) fraud; (4)

conversion; (5) violation of Penal Code section 496; (6) financial elder abuse; and (7) unfair business practices.

On March 11, 2026, Defendant Lawrence Malicdem ("Malicdem") filed a cross-complaint against Plaintiffs asserting three causes of action for (1) breach of contract; (2) quantum meruit/unjust enrichment; and (3) declaratory relief.

Plaintiffs now demur to Malicdem's cross-complaint. Malicdem opposes. Plaintiffs replied. /// /// Discussion As an initial matter, Plaintiffs' counsel's declaration in support of the demurrer attests, " I have made good faith efforts to meet and confer regarding the defects in the cross-complaint. I have requested the cross-complaint to be either dismissed or amended to correct the defects." (Toscano Decl., P. 2.)

Plaintiffs' counsel further attests that " [a]fter a number of meet and confer efforts, it is clear cross-complainant will not file an amended cross-complaint and will not dismiss the cross-complaint. Therefore, I will be filing a demurrer and possibly a motion to strike within the additional time permitted by CCP 430.41." (Toscano Decl., P. 3.)

The Court notes that, although Plaintiffs' counsel's declaration attests to meeting and conferring, the declaration is too vague to ascertain how the parties met and conferred. Without specificity, the Court cannot determine whether the parties met and conferred by telephone or in person and whether the attempt was in good faith.

Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 430.41, subdivision (a), " [b]efore filing a demurrer pursuant to this chapter, the demurring party shall meet and confer in person, by telephone, or by video conference with the party who filed the pleading that is subject to demurrer for the purpose of determining whether an agreement can be reached that would resolve the objections to be raised in the demurrer. " (Emphasis added.) Such meeting and conferring must be done in good faith with an effort to try to resolve the issues subject to the demurrer.

In light of the foregoing, the hearing on Plaintiffs' demurrer is continued to _______________, 2026 at 2:00 p.m. in Dept. 508.¿ The Case Management Conference is continued to the same date, time and location.

Plaintiffs are ¿ordered to meet¿and confer¿with Malicdem within 10 days of the date of this Order.¿If the parties are unable to resolve the pleading issues¿or if the parties are otherwise unable to meet and confer in good faith, Plaintiffs are to¿thereafter¿file and serve¿a declaration setting forth the efforts to meet and confer in compliance with¿Code of Civil Procedure section 430.41, subdivision (a)(3) within 15 days of this Order.

If a timely declaration is not filed, the Court will assume that the parties resolved the underlying issues and the demurrer and motion to strike will go off calendar.

Additionally, the parties did not lodge courtesy copies of the briefs. If the demurrer and motion to strike are continued, the parties must lodge the courtesy copies five days prior to the new hearing date. Plaintiffs are ordered to give notice of this Order.

DATED: August 26, 2026 ________________________________ Hon. Teresa A. Beaudet Judge, Los Angeles Superior Court Case Number: 26STCP01537 Hearing Date: August 26, 2026 Dept: 508 Superior Court of California County of Los Angeles Department 508 In Re: CBC SETTLEMENT FUNDING, LLC | Case No.: | 26STCP01537 | Hearing Date: | August 26, 2026 | Hearing Time: | 8:30 a.m. | [TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: PETITION FOR APPROVAL OF TRANSFER OF STRUCTURED SETTLEMENT PAYMENT RIGHTS | Background On April 17, 2026, Petitioner CBC Settlement Funding, LLC ("Petitioner") filed the instant petition for approval of transfer of structured settlement payment rights. Petitioner