Amlap ST LLC v. Asset Management Consultants Inc. CA2/7

Filed 3/7/22 Amlap ST LLC v. Asset Management Consultants Inc. CA2/7 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 SEVEN

AMLAP ST LLC et al., B309770

Plaintiffs and Appellants, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC459858) v.

ASSET MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS INC. et al.,

Defendants and Respondents.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Daniel J. Buckley, Judge. Reversed and remanded with directions. Catanzarite Law Corporation, Kenneth J. Catanzarite, Nicole M. Catanzarite-Woodward and Eric V. Anderton for Plaintiffs and Appellants Amlap ST, LLC and Superstition Lookout Delaware, LLC.

Jackson Tidus and Charles M. Clark for Defendants and Respondents Asset Management Consultants, Inc., BH & Sons, LLC, James R. Hopper, Kevin Hopper and Gloria Hopper. ___________________

The superior court granted the petition filed by Asset Management Consultants, Inc. (AMC), BH & Sons, LLC, James R. Hopper and Gloria Hopper (collectively BH parties) and Kevin Hopper (K. Hopper) to confirm an arbitration award dismissing the investment fraud claims of Amlap ST, LLC and Superstition Lookout Delaware, LLC (collectively Amlap investors) as barred by governing statutes of limitations; 1 denied the Amlap investors’ petition to vacate or correct the award; and entered judgment in favor of the BH parties and K. Hopper. The arbitration was conducted pursuant to the arbitration provision in the cotenancy agreement between BH & Sons, on the one hand, and tenant in common investors in commercial property located on East La Palma Avenue in Anaheim (the Amlap property), including Amlap ST, on the other hand.2 On appeal

1 The Amlap investors’ claims of fraud and the early procedural history of their litigation against the BH parties, K. Hopper and related individuals and entities are described in detail in our first opinion in this case, Amlap ST, LLC v. Asset Management Consultants, Inc. (Mar. 14, 2016, B263056) [nonpub. opn.] in which we reversed a prior order compelling arbitration pursuant to the terms of the arbitration provision in the contract by which BH & Sons acquired the Amlap property from a third party. 2 Amlap ST is a special purpose entity formed as a lender requirement to facilitate Superstition’s investment in the Amlap property.