Alonso v. Dulcich CA5

Filed 9/29/16 Alonso v. Dulcich CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

RAFAEL ALONSO, F071755 Plaintiff and Appellant, (Super. Ct. No. CV282651) v.

JOHN S. DULCICH, OPINION Defendant and Respondent.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. David R. Lampe, Judge. Yarra, Kharazi & Clason and H. Ty Kharazi for Plaintiff and Appellant. Clifford & Brown, Stephen T. Clifford and John R. Szewczyk for Defendant and Respondent. -ooOoo- Appellant, Rafael Alonso, challenges the dismissal of his action against respondent, John S. Dulcich after the trial court sustained Dulcich’s demurrer to the first amended complaint without leave to amend. Dulcich demurred on the grounds that: (1) Alonso did not have standing because the cause of action belonged to Alonso’s

bankruptcy estate; and (2) two of the three causes of action were barred by the litigation privilege. (Civ. Code,1 § 47, subd. (b).) Alonso argues his claim against Dulcich accrued after he filed his bankruptcy petition. Alonso further contends that his claims are not barred by section 47, subdivision (b), because Dulcich is his former attorney and the action is based on Dulcich’s alleged breach of his duty of loyalty and confidentiality. The trial court properly sustained the demurrer. Because the decision on whether to pursue the claim or abandon the claim had not yet been made in the bankruptcy proceeding, Alonso’s filing of this action was premature. Accordingly, the judgment will be affirmed. BACKGROUND In 2004, Alonso retained Dulcich to represent him in a civil suit. For the next five years, Dulcich represented Alonso in various other legal matters. Thereafter, Dulcich represented Marko Zubcic in his breach of contract action filed against Alonso. In July 2011, Dulcich obtained a judgment in favor of Zubcic and against Alonso for $75,000. On February 6, 2012, Alonso filed for bankruptcy protection to discharge the judgment against him. On June 1, 2012, Zubcic filed an adversary proceeding against Alonso seeking a denial of the bankruptcy discharge claim. Zubcic was represented by Phillip Gillet. Nevertheless, Dulcich acted as the lead attorney for Zubcic in a deposition in this adversary proceeding held on December 20, 2013. According to Alonso, during this deposition Dulcich asked questions that made Alonso aware that Dulcich “was intentionally using his vast store of knowledge of [Alonso’s] private family and financial