Young v. New Life Consulting CA2/5

Filed 6/18/15 Young v. New Life Consulting CA2/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIVE

WILLIAM YOUNG et al., B260043

Plaintiffs and Respondents, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. GC051054) v.

NEW LIFE CONSULTING, LLC.,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. John P. Doyle, Judge. Affirmed. Philip Y. Kim for Defendant and Appellant. Von Esch & Von Esch, Mark F. Von Esch for Plaintiffs and Respondents.

Appellant New Life Consulting, LLC (New Life) challenges aspects of the statement of decision issued by the trial court after a two-day court trial. Finding no error, we affirm.

PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL HISTORY New Life begins its appeal with a deficient factual statement.1 We cannot discern the gravamen of the plaintiffs’ claim for relief, or New Life’s defense thereto, from the statement of facts contained in New Life’s opening brief. The following is a compilation of facts provided by New Life, together with certain allegations of fact gleaned from the balance of its brief. Plaintiff JBY International, Inc. (JBY) and New Life entered into a written “Finder’s Agreement” in 2010 pursuant to which JBY was to receive a finder’s fee if it produced “qualified investors as further described in the Finders Agreement.” At an earlier unstated time, JYB and plaintiffs Jennifer Young (JY) and William Young (WY) had negotiated the terms of a litigation settlement among themselves and Park Place EB5 (Park Place). That settlement included a provision that finder’s fees due to JBY would be paid by New Life to Park Place instead of to JBY. After plaintiffs had signed the writing settling that litigation and transmitted it to counsel for New Life and before any other party signed it, plaintiffs gave notice they were rescinding their consent to the agreement for reasons they stated (but which are not explained by New Life). The litigation which that agreement was supposed to settle was dismissed prior to all parties signing the settlement agreement. New Life does not describe why JBY, JY and WY sued it in the present litigation, or how the prior litigation is related to the present suit. We can only make inferences from the description in its “Statement of the Case” that this is a suit “alleging Breach of Contract and Violation of Compensation” that plaintiffs sought to recover a finder’s fee