Pak v. Rassman CA4/3

Filed 12/11/25 Pak v. Rassman CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

JAE PAK,

Plaintiff, Cross-defendant and G061970, G063904 Appellant, (Super. Ct. No. 30-2020- v. 01152149)

WILLIAM RASSMAN, OPINION

Defendant, Cross-complainant and Respondent.

Appeals from a judgment and a postjudgment order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Richard Y. Lee, Judge. Affirmed. Frost Brown Todd and Madison S. Spach, Jr., for Plaintiff, Cross- defendant, and Appellant. Buchalter, Robert M. Dato; Godes & Preis, Oliver B. Dreger and Benjamin G. Reynolds for Defendant, Cross-complainant, and Respondent.

Cross-defendant Jae Pak appeals from a nearly $1.4 million judgment and a $576,000 attorney fee award for his former colleague, William Rassman. Pak contends (1) the court erred in permitting Rassman to add an unsupported Fair Employment and Housing Act harassment claim; (2) the court misinstructed the jury and allowed unsupported claims, including individual claims Rassman lacked standing to assert; and (3) the damages award was unsupported and the fee award unjustified. We find no reversible error and affirm. FACTS Pak and Rassman, both medical doctors, co-owned and jointly operated New Hair Institute Medical Group (NHI), which provided hair- transplant services. Their relationship eventually deteriorated, with Pak claiming Rassman had become incapacitated and was not generating enough revenue. He decided to separate from Rassman and start a new business. Pak then took steps to exclude Rassman from the business. He informed staff that Rassman was no longer allowed in the office, hired security guards to enforce the directive, stopped paying Rassman’s salary, and purported to terminate his employment. He withdrew $600,000 from NHI’s bank account without Rassman’s approval and used the money for personal purposes. He formed a new entity and assumed control of NHI’s assets. And he filed a complaint against Rassman with the state medical board, which found the allegations unsupported. Pak sued Rassman for breach of fiduciary duty and related claims. Rassman filed a cross-complaint against Pak and NHI, alleging conversion, breach of fiduciary duty, wrongful termination, and other claims. While the action was pending, Rassman filed an administrative complaint with the Department of Fair Employment and Housing, alleging that Pak