Kvassay v. Kvassay CA2/3

Filed 6/2/15 Kvassay v. Kvassay CA2/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

PETER E. KVASSAY et al., B254301

Plaintiffs and Appellants, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC498669) v.

ROBERT V. KVASSAY,

Defendant and Respondent.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Abraham Khan, Judge. Affirmed. Troy A. Stewart for Plaintiffs and Appellants. Russakow & Tan and Lisa Tan for Defendant and Respondent.

_______________________________________

This appeal arises from years of lawsuits among three brothers: Peter, Richard, and Robert Kvassay.1 Following litigation in probate and federal bankruptcy courts, Peter and Richard filed this case against Robert seeking to set aside the probate court’s judgment because the court had “made a mistake.” Robert filed a demurrer, a motion to strike, and a motion for sanctions. Seven days before the hearing, Peter and Richard dismissed their complaint without prejudice. They did not serve their request for dismissal on Robert. Counsel for Peter and Richard did not appear on the hearing date for the demurrer and motion to strike nor at the later hearing date on Robert’s motion for sanctions. Peter and Richard filed no opposition to the sanctions motion, nor did they ever raise before the trial court any of the arguments they now propose to make on appeal. Accordingly, they have forfeited those contentions. We therefore affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND The three litigants’ parents, Emanuel and Maria Kvassay, created a family trust in 1993.2 Maria died in 2001 and Emanuel died in 2006. We need not detail here all of the proceedings that have gone before. In summary, in May 2010 Robert as trustee sought to evict Peter and Richard from a large parcel of property owned by the trust. The court granted the petition. Pending appeal, a “third party” posted $216,000 in lieu of a bond. In the meantime, in May 2012 Peter and Richard filed a petition under the Probate Code to remove Robert as trustee. They also filed a civil suit at some point against Robert, alleging fraud, breach of contract, negligence, and other claims. According to the complaint in this case,3 in September 2012 the probate court held an afternoon hearing on Robert’s motion to release the “bond.” Peter claims he had filed a bankruptcy petition earlier that day and so the probate court should not have