Amaro v. Weber

California Court of Appeal Dec 19, 2025 No. C102783Published

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the trial court had jurisdiction to review the Secretary of State's denial of applications for the Victims of Corporate Fraud Compensation Fund, but erred in finding the Secretary waived her objections. The case was remanded for the Secretary to reconsider the applications on their merits without relying on the previously rejected resubmission determination.

Issues

Whether the trial court had jurisdiction to review the Secretary's determination that applications were ineligible resubmissions.
Whether the Secretary waived her objections to the applications by failing to consider them on their merits.
Whether the Secretary may reject applications based on facial defects in the underlying complaint.
What is the proper burden of proof for claimants during the Secretary's initial administrative review versus subsequent judicial review.

Disposition. reversed and remanded

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The trial court had jurisdiction to review the Secretary’s resubmission determination; (2) the resubmission determination must be set aside; and (3) the Secretary did not waive her other objections to the applications.”

“The Secretary did not exhaust her power by denying the applications as resubmissions. We set aside the denial for lack of evidentiary support but conclude that the Secretary retains the power to consider the applications on their merits.”

“The Secretary cannot reject their applications merely because the complaint was facially deficient or failed to state a cause of action for intentional fraud against the corporations.”

Filed 12/19/25 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento) ----

ROCHELLE AMARO et al., C102783

Plaintiffs and Respondents, (Super. Ct. No. 34-2022- 00324700-CU-MC-GDS) v.

SHIRLEY N. WEBER, AS SECRETARY OF STATE, etc.,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Sacramento County, Peter K. Southworth, Judge. Reversed and remanded.

Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Thomas S. Patterson, Assistant Attorney General, Anthony R. Hakl and Jeffrey A. Rich, Deputy Attorneys General for Defendant and Appellant.

Law Offices of Mark A. Redmond and Mark A. Redmond; Salisbury Legal Corp. and Lawrence J. Salisbury for Plaintiffs and Respondents.

After petitioners1 obtained a default judgment for over $8 million against two corporations (the corporations) for fraud and misrepresentation, they applied for restitution from the Victims of Corporate Fraud Compensation Fund (the fund) that is administered by the Secretary of State (the Secretary). The Secretary deemed the applications ineligible as resubmissions of previously denied applications.

1 The petitioners are: Rochelle Amaro, Arthur Andalon, Kathleen Grasso Andersen, Sark and Armen Antaramian, Jess J. and Donna Marie Araujo, William E. Baker, George Beasley, Octavio and Lourdes Beltran, Manuel Bernstein, Allan and Rochelle Blair, Norman P. Briggs, Hasan Brown, Clara I. Bulla, Christian J. Burke, Winston C. Burns Sr., Raul Cardenas, Laurie G. Cardone, Glenda Cash, Chi S. Chang, Theresa Codilla, Joe L. Crain, E.A. and Carole Crawford, Bridget Cunningham, Fred De Ronda, Joe M. De Silva Jr., Luis and Myra Diaz, Fred M. and Maryellen G. Diaz, Thomas Doslak, Alan Dubin, The Gerald A. & Mary Helen Dye Family Trust, Raul Field Escandon, Caryl Fairfull, Ali Farvili, Omid Farvili, Perla Farvili, Naime Fatoorehchi, Antonio A. Ferrer, Pamela Franklin, Stanley Franklin, Willy Frei, David and Evelyn Garfinkle, Cornelius George, Giuliano Family Trust, Ruth Jean and Dinique Glover, The Haston Family Trust, Alice Hawkins, Cleophus Hawkins, Robert I. Hewlett, Marsha G. Hewlett, Shigeyaru Hiraiwa, Gerald D. Hoerner, Peggy A. Jasso, George Jerome, Leslie M. Kalman, Lawrence Katz, Ernest Kaufman, Edith S. Klaus, Carmen Knopke, Richard J. Koerner, Jeffrey Kozek, Donald and Petti Kruthaup, Michael Lam, Joseph Laroche Jr., Bruce and Sandra Latimer, John E. and Alice Lazor, Richard Leeds, Edward and Constance Lillie, Lillie Family Trust, Patricia Ungar and Philip Linseen, Philip Lobel, Nancy Lynn, Donald Macri, Joyce and Robert Marcarelli, Fernando L. Marcolino, Don Marshall, Anton Martin, Harald G. Martin, Vito Mastro, John and Roberta McDowall, Robert McGraw, Sally Mikkelson, Felix Mille, Brenda Miller, Estate of Barbara Jean Miller, Donald Miller, Jane Miller, Stephen Miller, Thomas Albert Miller, Dolores and Rod Mobasher, Joel Nathaniel, Greg Nicholson, Terrence W. Novatt, Chatur Patel, Leena Parekh, Nihar Parekh, Peters Revocable Trust, Thomas Peterson, Anne Petranove-McGraw, William Pratt, Charles Radke, Hughey Ray, Georgette and Merle Robboy, Amador and Maryellen Rodriguez, Shirley Rothman as Trustee of the Shirley Rothman Revocable Living Trust, Jerry and Marge Russ, Dennie Samuels, Sandoval Revocable Living Trust, Judy Sandoval, Arnold Schoenfeld, Barbara Siersma, Allyn B. and Ursula H. Simmons, Gerry Stein, Lisa Stein, Julie and Mike Sulman, Andrew and Kristen Tanner, David Tegen, Chet Thomas, Charles Torigian, Michael Tsao, Richard and Ricki Ungar, Robert Vangelder, Arti and Hari Vaswani, Carl and Olga Vienna, A. Larry Winnick, and Ralph E. and Maryanna Worthing.

Amaro v. Weber

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief