Sui v. Landi

California Court of Appeal Jan 3, 1985 No. A025246Published

Before: King

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court affirmed the denial of the motion to dissolve a preliminary injunction and imposed sanctions on the appellant for pursuing a frivolous appeal. Because the appellant provided only a partial clerk's transcript, the court conclusively presumed the evidence supported the trial court's judgment.

Issues

Whether the trial court should have dissolved the preliminary injunction due to extrinsic fraud.
Whether the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the case involves federal land patents and copyrights.

Disposition. Affirmed with sanctions

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The appeal is unquestionably frivolous, vexatious and without merit.”

“The order denying the motion to dissolve the preliminary injunction is affirmed. A penalty of $5,000 is imposed on Carol Landi, to be recovered as costs by Norman and Dorothy Sui.”

Opinion

KING, J.

Carol Landi appeals from the trial court’s denial of her motion to dissolve a preliminary injunction. We affirm and impose sanctions on Landi for bringing this frivolous appeal.

Landi apparently believes she has a valid “federal land patent” giving her paramount title to the Mountain View properties of respondents, Norman and Dorothy Sui.

Landi claims this patent is valid under the 1848

[385]

Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. She also possesses a document she calls a “declaration of land patent” which is copyrighted. On July 23, 1982, she recorded these documents against the Suis’ properties.

In September 1982 Landi sent notices to the Suis and their tenants claiming that she owned their properties. This was followed by notices to quit the premises. Finally, Landi filed unlawful detainer actions against the Suis’ tenants.

On November 19, 1982, the Suis filed a complaint against Landi, alleging slander of title and interference with a contract, and seeking cancellation of the recorded instruments. The court issued a temporary restraining order on December 16, 1982, and a preliminary injunction on January 13, 1983, which prohibited Landi from entering on the Suis’ properties, annoying the residents of these properties, proceeding with the unlawful detainer action against the residents, recording documents in Santa Clara County concerning the Suis’ properties, and filing further actions concerning these properties. Landi moved to dissolve the preliminary injunction on October 28, 1983. The court amended the preliminary injunction to correct the address of the Suis’ properties and denied “the Petition for Order Dissolving the Temporary Restraining Order [sz'c].”

Landi has pursued two related actions in this court. First, she filed a petition for writ of prohibition or mandate (A025957) on February 1, 1984, which Division Four of this court denied. The California Supreme Court denied her petition for hearing on March 16, 1984. She filed another petition for writ of mandate (A027625) on June 18, 1984, which this division denied on October 25, 1984. The California Supreme Court denied a petition for hearing in that case on November 20, 1984. These actions all claim the state courts have no jurisdiction to hear the Suis’ complaint because it challenges federal patents and copyrights.

Sui v. Landi

AI Brief

KING, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief