CBM Investments v. Royal Business Bank CA2/8

Filed 3/6/23 CBM Investments v. Royal Business Bank CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 EIGHT

CBM INVESTMENTS, INC., et al., B310205

Cross-complainants and (Los Angeles County Appellants, Super. Ct. No. BC722043)

v.

ROYAL BUSINESS BANK,

Cross-defendant and Respondent.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Holly Fujie, Judge. Dismissed.

Law Offices of Tony M. Lu and Tony M. Lu for Cross- complainants and Appellants.

Neufeld Marks, Paul S. Marks and Yuriko M. Shikai for Cross-defendant and Respondent.

_______________________

CBM Investments, Inc. and CBM Systems, Inc (collectively, CBM) appeal from the court’s order granting Royal Business Bank’s motion for determination of a good faith settlement (Code Civ. Proc., § 877.6). We dismiss the appeal. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Peng Chen sued CBM and other defendants, alleging causes of action for conversion, violation of Penal Code section 496, constructive trust, and civil conspiracy. CBM cross- complained against Royal Business Bank and other parties. Royal Business Bank moved for a determination that its settlement of prior related litigation had been made in good faith, barring the claims made against it in CBM’s cross-complaint. After extensive briefing and argument, the trial court granted Royal Business Bank’s motion. The clerk of the superior court served the court’s minute order on the parties on October 21, 2020. CBM did not file a petition for writ of mandate seeking review of the good faith settlement ruling; instead, CBM filed a notice of appeal on January 22, 2021. DISCUSSION In its respondent’s brief, Royal Business Bank contends CBM’s appeal should be dismissed because CBM was required to seek review of the good faith settlement determination through a petition for writ of mandate rather than by direct appeal.